ML
    • Recent
    • Categories
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    • Register
    • Login

    I did a thing, have a quick Linux question

    Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved IT Discussion
    linuxxenxenserverhyper-vkvm
    61 Posts 13 Posters 7.8k Views
    Loading More Posts
    • Oldest to Newest
    • Newest to Oldest
    • Most Votes
    Reply
    • Reply as topic
    Log in to reply
    This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
    • S
      Sparkum @DustinB3403
      last edited by

      @DustinB3403

      I'd rather lose 1 disk and 2TB versus lose 1 disk and 6TB

      wirestyle22W DustinB3403D 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • wirestyle22W
        wirestyle22 @Sparkum
        last edited by

        @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

        @DustinB3403

        I've got my important media and my "who the heck cares" media.

        You raid 0 for speed

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
        • DustinB3403D
          DustinB3403
          last edited by

          RAID0 would give you a lot of read/write performance while not caring if you lose a drive (as the data is gone anyways)

          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • wirestyle22W
            wirestyle22 @Sparkum
            last edited by

            @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

            @DustinB3403

            I'd rather lose 1 disk and 2TB versus lose 1 disk and 6TB

            How many TB do you have that you can't lose?

            S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • DustinB3403D
              DustinB3403 @Sparkum
              last edited by

              @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

              @DustinB3403

              I'd rather lose 1 disk and 2TB versus lose 1 disk and 6TB

              I don't get this concept...

              RAID0 you'd lose it all, no RAID you'd have no "protection" of a drive failing either.

              So unless you mean to mirror the drives in a separate mechanism for protection, while not getting any benefit of RAID, you have a backup.

              S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
              • S
                Sparkum @wirestyle22
                last edited by

                @wirestyle22

                I'd say 8-10TB

                wirestyle22W 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • wirestyle22W
                  wirestyle22 @Sparkum
                  last edited by wirestyle22

                  @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                  @wirestyle22

                  I'd say 8-10TB

                  and how much total? Also how quickly are you going to expand?

                  S 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • S
                    Sparkum @DustinB3403
                    last edited by

                    @DustinB3403

                    Well what are we talking here, for me it would be (atleast) 3 2TB drives, so you are saying make 1 giant 6TB raid 0 correct?

                    So 1 drive dies I lose 6TB

                    Or are you saying make 3 2TB Raid 0's so that if I lose 1 I only lose 2TB
                    Can I then make it appear to be one disk though?

                    And please keep in mind there might just not be a linux thing I dont know.

                    For example in Windows I have stablebit drive pool pooling my drives so that if I lose 1 drive I only lose the data on that one drive.

                    wirestyle22W DustinB3403D 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                    • S
                      Sparkum @wirestyle22
                      last edited by

                      @wirestyle22

                      Total (used and unused) I'm sitting at 22TB.

                      And I'd say I'm expanding fast enough that I felt I needed 22TB, have 6TB free, had prob 12TB+ free 6 months ago.

                      Offloading some junk to the cloud though currently.

                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • wirestyle22W
                        wirestyle22 @Sparkum
                        last edited by

                        @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                        @DustinB3403

                        Well what are we talking here, for me it would be (atleast) 3 2TB drives, so you are saying make 1 giant 6TB raid 0 correct?

                        So 1 drive dies I lose 6TB

                        Or are you saying make 3 2TB Raid 0's so that if I lose 1 I only lose 2TB
                        Can I then make it appear to be one disk though?

                        And please keep in mind there might just not be a linux thing I dont know.

                        For example in Windows I have stablebit drive pool pooling my drives so that if I lose 1 drive I only lose the data on that one drive.

                        My thought was if you have 2TB you can't lose out of 10, put everything in a raid 0 and then buy a small NAS backup for the 2 TB.

                        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                        • DustinB3403D
                          DustinB3403 @Sparkum
                          last edited by

                          @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                          @DustinB3403

                          Well what are we talking here, for me it would be (atleast) 3 2TB drives, so you are saying make 1 giant 6TB raid 0 correct?

                          So 1 drive dies I lose 6TB

                          Or are you saying make 3 2TB Raid 0's so that if I lose 1 I only lose 2TB
                          Can I then make it appear to be one disk though?

                          And please keep in mind there might just not be a linux thing I dont know.

                          For example in Windows I have stablebit drive pool pooling my drives so that if I lose 1 drive I only lose the data on that one drive.

                          I'm just trying to understand what you are trying to do.

                          Without RAID, you won't be able to present multiple disks to any OS (unless it's FakeRAID and Windows) and show it as one drive.

                          S 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • S
                            Sparkum @DustinB3403
                            last edited by

                            @DustinB3403

                            My initial question was, is there a way to group harddrives in a non raid format. So yes, a fakeraid

                            DustinB3403D 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • DustinB3403D
                              DustinB3403 @Sparkum
                              last edited by

                              @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                              @DustinB3403

                              My initial question was, is there a way to group harddrives in a non raid format. So yes, a fakeraid

                              There is, and FakeRAID is about as useful as RAID0 (if you want to protect the data).

                              Simply don't use it.

                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • S
                                Sparkum @DustinB3403
                                last edited by

                                @DustinB3403

                                And maybe this is just me going from Windows to Linux, I admittedly don't know anything about how harddrives work in Linux

                                wirestyle22W 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • dafyreD
                                  dafyre
                                  last edited by

                                  I'd do RAID1, or RAID 6... I've only got ~3TB of data, but only 2 x 3TB drives (one of them is my backup drive at the moment).

                                  If I don't have a real RAID controller, I'd use mdadm for Linux. I've used it in the past, and it worked very well.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • wirestyle22W
                                    wirestyle22 @Sparkum
                                    last edited by

                                    @Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                                    @DustinB3403

                                    And maybe this is just me going from Windows to Linux, I admittedly don't know anything about how harddrives work in Linux

                                    The thing to know is that software raid is totally unreliable in windows and very reliable in linux

                                    1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                    • DustinB3403D
                                      DustinB3403
                                      last edited by

                                      And FakeRAID in linux will (every time) show you all of the drives. It will not present a single disk to you. It will show all of the disks in the "array" as individual disks. Because FakeRAID is dangerous and linux makes that very clear.

                                      1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                                      • wirestyle22W
                                        wirestyle22
                                        last edited by wirestyle22

                                        I'm making an assumption right now because I think I pretty much understand the way pooling works in relation to HD IOPS and I'm highly doubting you get any of the real benefit of a raid doing it that way--at least speed wise. Hypothetical scenario:

                                        You create a software raid in ZFS with 4 hard drives in pool1. let's say 1200 IOPS total for this pool.
                                        Later you add 4 hard drives to that raid but it's added in pool2. Each pool is 1200 IOPS, not 2400 IOPS.

                                        FakeRAID is probably non-existent IOPS gains. It's like grouping for the sake of a label (I think). @JaredBusch could explain this better than I could though.

                                        scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                        • scottalanmillerS
                                          scottalanmiller @wirestyle22
                                          last edited by

                                          @wirestyle22 said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                                          FakeRAID is probably non-existent IOPS gains. It's like grouping for the sake of a label (I think). @JaredBusch could explain this better than I could though.

                                          FakeRAID has all the IOPS gains and the mirroring or redundancy. The Fake refers to the fact that it is built to trick you into think that it is hardware, when it is not. The RAID portion is real.

                                          wirestyle22W 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                          • wirestyle22W
                                            wirestyle22 @scottalanmiller
                                            last edited by wirestyle22

                                            @scottalanmiller said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                                            @wirestyle22 said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                                            FakeRAID is probably non-existent IOPS gains. It's like grouping for the sake of a label (I think). @JaredBusch could explain this better than I could though.

                                            FakeRAID has all the IOPS gains and the mirroring or redundancy. The Fake refers to the fact that it is built to trick you into think that it is hardware, when it is not. The RAID portion is real.

                                            Glad to be wrong about the raid portion of it but you can only Raid 0 or 1 with nothing nested and only whole disks. No hot spares and no hot swappable drives. I don't see why anyone would do it.

                                            dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • 1
                                            • 2
                                            • 3
                                            • 4
                                            • 2 / 4
                                            • First post
                                              Last post