On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 12:03 PM, Keith Bierman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> On Apr 15, 2008, at 10:58 AM, Tim wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 10:09 AM, Maurice Volaski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > I have 16 disks in RAID 5 and I'm not worried.
> >
> > >I'm sure you're already aware, but if not, 22 drives in a raid-6 is
> > >absolutely SUICIDE when using SATA disks.  12 disks is the upper end of
> > what
> > >you want even with raid-6.  The odds of you losing data in a 22 disk
> > raid-6
> > >is far too great to be worth it if you care about your data.  /rant
> >
>
>
> You could also be driving your car down the freeway at 100mph drunk, high,
> and without a seatbelt on and not be worried.  The odds will still be
> horribly against you.
>
>
> Perhaps providing the computations rather than the conclusions would be
> more persuasive  on a technical list ;>
>
> --
> Keith H. Bierman   [EMAIL PROTECTED]      | AIM kbiermank
> 5430 Nassau Circle East                  |
> Cherry Hills Village, CO 80113           | 303-997-2749
> <speaking for myself*> Copyright 2008
>
>
>
>
>

What fun is that?  ;)

http://blogs.netapp.com/dave/2006/03/expect_double_d.html

There's a layman's explanation.
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to