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 404960
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: RAID Z
by Kebabbert on Tue 19th Jan 2010 17:33 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: RAID Z"
Kebabbert
Member since:
2007-07-27

Why can you not replace hardware raid controllers? Dont you know that ZFS protects against much errors than hardware raid? I would not trust hardware raid, actually.

Here is another presentation on Silent Corruption from the CERN guy (their large physics multi billion machines produces huge amounts of data, imagine corrupted data worth of billion of dollars). He concludes that checksums (hardware raid) is not enough. You need end-to-end checksum (ZFS). He talks about they get corrupted data on their Linux rack servers, silently:

https://indico.desy.de/getFile.py/access?contribId=65&sessionId=42&r...


Even better; here is a website explaining how bad raid-5 is, and lots of shortcomings hardware raid has:
www.baarf.com
Lots of sysadmins explains technical details there.

Edited 2010-01-19 17:36 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: RAID Z
by gilboa on Tue 19th Jan 2010 17:50 in reply to "RE[4]: RAID Z"
gilboa Member since:
2005-07-06

Forgive me for being blunt.
But you are the 2'nd man to post this link.
I'm well aware of silent corruption issues.

Never the less, if you have taken the time to read the rest of the thread before posting, you'd notice that I have fairly reasonable reasons for avoiding ZFS in production use, even though I do use Solaris.

- Gilboa

Edited 2010-01-19 17:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: RAID Z
by Laurence on Tue 19th Jan 2010 18:28 in reply to "RE[5]: RAID Z"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

Forgive me for being blunt.
But you are the 2'nd man to post this link.
I'm well aware of silent corruption issues.

Never the less, if you have taken the time to read the rest of the thread before posting, you'd notice that I have fairly reasonable reasons for avoiding ZFS in production use, even though I do use Solaris.


That's entirely subjective.

Reply Parent Score: 2