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 8.0k 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.
    • 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
            • dafyreD
              dafyre @wirestyle22
              last edited by

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

              @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 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.

              Raid 0, I see very very very few cases where it'd be useful... But on a real raid controller, you can do hot spares for raid 1.

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

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

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

                @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 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.

                Raid 0, I see very very very few cases where it'd be useful... But on a real raid controller, you can do hot spares for raid 1.

                On a real controller yeah but we are talking about FakeRAID.

                dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                • dafyreD
                  dafyre @wirestyle22
                  last edited by

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

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

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

                  @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 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.

                  Raid 0, I see very very very few cases where it'd be useful... But on a real raid controller, you can do hot spares for raid 1.

                  On a real controller yeah but we are talking about FakeRAID.

                  True. The need for a hot spare is not quite as critical in RAID 1 as it would be in RAID 5 or 6... Can the fakeRAID controllers do anything other than 1 and maybe 5?

                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                  • stacksofplatesS
                    stacksofplates @DustinB3403
                    last edited by stacksofplates

                    @DustinB3403 said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

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

                    @dafyre

                    Are you able to group harddrives in a non raid format with linux?

                    Like a stablebit drive pool for linux kind of thing?

                    Versus making raid 0

                    Why would you do this, when you could use MD Raid and have a highly resilient solution?

                    Because if the drives are different sizes then you are limited to the size of the smallest drive in your array. With ZFS or Btrfs you can have different sized drives and the data span across all of them.

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

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

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

                      @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 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.

                      Raid 0, I see very very very few cases where it'd be useful... But on a real raid controller, you can do hot spares for raid 1.

                      SSD caching benefits greatly from Raid 0

                      dafyreD 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                      • dafyreD
                        dafyre @wirestyle22
                        last edited by

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

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

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

                        @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 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.

                        Raid 0, I see very very very few cases where it'd be useful... But on a real raid controller, you can do hot spares for raid 1.

                        SSD caching benefits greatly from Raid 0

                        That falls under one of the few use cases where RAID 0 would be useful, lol.

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

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

                          @DustinB3403 said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

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

                          @dafyre

                          Are you able to group harddrives in a non raid format with linux?

                          Like a stablebit drive pool for linux kind of thing?

                          Versus making raid 0

                          Why would you do this, when you could use MD Raid and have a highly resilient solution?

                          Because if the drives are different sizes then you are limited to the size of the smallest drive in your array. With ZFS or Btrfs you can have different sized drives and the data span across all of them.

                          100% this.

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

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

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

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

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

                            @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 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.

                            Raid 0, I see very very very few cases where it'd be useful... But on a real raid controller, you can do hot spares for raid 1.

                            SSD caching benefits greatly from Raid 0

                            That falls under one of the few use cases where RAID 0 would be useful, lol.

                            As a component of raid 10? You could put a bunch of drives together to delete everything on them faster? lol

                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                            • R
                              r0dISK
                              last edited by

                              22TB ? mdadm + RAID6...

                              scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • Deleted74295D
                                Deleted74295 Banned
                                last edited by

                                Do all three.

                                Set yourself a challenge that across a 12 month period, you will learn all 3 environments. Then you'll be far better served across any job role, you'll understand the strengths and weaknesses of them and how to mange them.

                                The biggest career set back for any IT guy is complacency and standing still, keep pushing yourself out of your comfort zone.

                                And whilst you are tearing 1 environment down, you get to learn how to migrate between hyper-visors as well.

                                scottalanmillerS 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                • scottalanmillerS
                                  scottalanmiller @Deleted74295
                                  last edited by

                                  @Breffni-Potter said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                                  Do all three.

                                  Set yourself a challenge that across a 12 month period, you will learn all 3 environments. Then you'll be far better served across any job role, you'll understand the strengths and weaknesses of them and how to mange them.

                                  The biggest career set back for any IT guy is complacency and standing still, keep pushing yourself out of your comfort zone.

                                  And whilst you are tearing 1 environment down, you get to learn how to migrate between hyper-visors as well.

                                  This all plays into the "why a home lab" thread.

                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • scottalanmillerS
                                    scottalanmiller @r0dISK
                                    last edited by

                                    @r0dISK said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:

                                    22TB ? mdadm + RAID6...

                                    That's a lot to have under RAID 6, but for a home lab is fine.

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