[SATLUG] RAID 5 setup
dkowis at shlrm.org
Sat Jan 19 10:54:07 CST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Kristian Erik Hermansen wrote:
> On Jan 19, 2008 7:47 AM, toddwbucy <toddwbucy at grandecom.net> wrote:
>> performance is one of my goals but I also want the data reliability of
>> RAID 5. I am also curious about what is the best format for this set up
>> (ext3, riefers, xfs, ect).
> As long as you backup your important data frequently, it is probably
> more efficient than having RAID5. Google does not use RAID on their
> servers and instead utilize the "copy three times" philosophy. If you
> care about your data, don't use reiserfs. XFS is probably the best
> choice for you based on large writes of contiguous data (movie
I care about my data, and I use reiserfs. Rieserfs has never let me
down. XFS on the other hand has.
Not to start a flame war or anything, but it really matters on levels of
performance. They're all about equally reliable.
XFS is generally really good with really big files.
reiserfs is generally really good with lots and lots of files.
ext3 is just kinda generally good. It doesn't stand out at any
JFS is slow, but it uses the least amount of CPU.
That's what I've come up with when doing filesystem research.
| www.ronpaul2008.com | www.sourcemage.org |
| Ron Paul for President! | SourceMage GNU/Linux |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the SATLUG