On Tuesday January 24, [email protected] wrote:
> On 2006-01-24T11:40:47, NeilBrown <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > I am expecting that I will ultimately support online conversion of
> > raid5 to raid6 with only one extra device. This process is not
> > (efficiently) checkpointable and so will be at-your-risk.
>
> So the best way to go about that, if one wants to keep that option open
> w/o that risk, would be to not create a raid5 in the first place, but a
> raid6 with one disk missing?
>
> Maybe even have mdadm default to that - as long as just one parity disk
> is missing, no slowdown should happen, right?
Not exactly....
raid6 has rotating parity drives, for both P and Q (the two different
'parity' blocks).
With one missing device, some Ps, some Qs, and some data would be
missing, and you would definitely get a slowdown trying to generate
some of it.
We could define a raid6 layout that didn't rotate Q. Then you would
be able to do what you suggest.
However it would then be no different from creating a normal raid5 and
supporting online conversion from raid5 to raid6-with-non-rotating-Q.
This conversion doesn't need an reshaping pass, just a recovery of the
now-missing device.
raid6-with-non-rotating-Q would have similar issues to raid4 - one
drive becomes a hot-spot for writes. I don't know how much of an
issue this really is though.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
