Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Jan 2010 16:57 UTC, submitted by wanker90210
Hardware, Embedded Systems ACM's latest journal had an interesting article about RAID which suggested it might be time for triple parity raid. "How much longer will current RAID techniques persevere? The RAID levels were codified in the late 1980s; double-parity RAID, known as RAID-6, is the current standard for high-availability, space-efficient storage. The incredible growth of hard-drive capacities, however, could impose serious limitations on the reliability even of RAID-6 systems. Recent trends in hard drives show that triple-parity RAID must soon become pervasive."
Thread beginning with comment 404827
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: RAID Z
by tylerdurden on Tue 19th Jan 2010 03:18 UTC in reply to "RE: RAID Z"
tylerdurden
Member since:
2009-03-17

RAID is not a standard either. What does userbase have to do with anything? Same could be said about linux/BSD/windows whatever... "not everyone uses it"

You can use RAID in your solaris root partition, and then manage extra partitions and their redundancy via ZFS, and yes with triple parity even. If you are putting many TB's of data in your root partition, you deserve what you get.

What the heck do patents have to do with triple parity? I think you just had an anti-solaris narrative and decided discussing triple-parity was a good place to dump it...

Edited 2010-01-19 03:24 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: RAID Z
by gilboa on Tue 19th Jan 2010 08:13 in reply to "RE[2]: RAID Z"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

RAID is not a standard either. What does userbase have to do with anything? Same could be said about linux/BSD/windows whatever... "not everyone uses it"
.

As I said in another post, if I can take a soft-RAID5 array (E.g. on-board controllers) that was built under Windows and move it to Linux and back, its standard.

You can use RAID in your solaris root partition, and then manage extra partitions and their redundancy via ZFS, and yes with triple parity even. If you are putting many TB's of data in your root partition, you deserve what you get.


Option A:
Hardware RAID7.
A. Cross platform support.
B. Battery backup for write cache.
C. Hugh cache.
D. Full triple parity for world + dog: boot sector, boot partition, OS, data, etc.

Option B:
ZFS:
A. Works under OpenSolaris, and to a less extent, FreeBSD. (And no, FUSE/Linux is not an option)
B. No write cache.
C. Triple parity for data only.

What the heck do patents have to do with triple parity?


Gee, why can't I use ZFS on my Linux severs?
Wait a minute, let me think...
CDDL... Not being able to reverse engineer a GPL'ed version of ZFS under Linux due to patents...

No idea. Really. None.

I think you just had an anti-solaris narrative and decided discussing triple-parity was a good place to dump it...


God I hate fanboys.
I've been using Solaris since the mid ~98. You? *

- Gilboa
* I know that in your fanboyish eyes, anyone that doesn't share your view that ZFS is the best thing since sliced bread, is either stupid or has something personal against Solaris, but when you grow up, you'll understand that some people might have other priorities other than "Oh look! Shiny!" - E.g. not being tied to a certain platform or problems with OpenSolaris' support model that makes it irrelevant for mass production deployment. (And no, we are not turning this thread to a flame war...)

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: RAID Z
by strcpy on Tue 19th Jan 2010 15:25 in reply to "RE[3]: RAID Z"
strcpy Member since:
2009-05-20


Gee, why can't I use ZFS on my Linux severs?
Wait a minute, let me think...
CDDL... Not being able to reverse engineer a GPL'ed version of ZFS under Linux due to patents...


Gee, you are a Linux troll.

It always amazes me when these Linux zealots, without any hesitation, assume that something is either somehow bad or irrelevant if it is not part of Linux. And if it is part of Linux, it can never be bad or irrelevant. Gee.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: RAID Z
by garyd on Tue 19th Jan 2010 17:05 in reply to "RE[3]: RAID Z"
garyd Member since:
2008-10-22

As I said in another post, if I can take a soft-RAID5 array (E.g. on-board controllers) that was built under Windows and move it to Linux and back, its standard.


Yes, but that's only if you use a file system that both operating systems can read and the controller is recognized by both operating systems. It's only possible because the controller abstracts the array in to a logical volume that the PC can see -- not because it's a "standard" RAID configuration. The user land portion of the operating systems doesn't care about anything but the file system. The OS kernel and drivers take care of the hardware abstraction layer so if both platforms don't have drivers for your controller's chipset or can't read the file system format then you're out of luck. I don't see how any of this makes portability between operating systems easier merely because you chose a RAID. I could use fibre channel or iSCSI to mount a volume on either OS, too, but that's also accomplished via drivers and file system support as the OS still doesn't care anything about how the disks are organized by the storage manager.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: RAID Z
by tylerdurden on Wed 20th Jan 2010 18:28 in reply to "RE[3]: RAID Z"
tylerdurden Member since:
2009-03-17

I think you are projecting a tad too much here... regarding "fanboyism" Good grief.

And BTW, you don't seem to know what the word "standard" means.

Reply Parent Score: 1