From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Mar 21 11:27:56 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from apollo.backplane.com (apollo.backplane.com [216.240.41.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4386E37B41A for ; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:27:52 -0800 (PST) Received: (from dillon@localhost) by apollo.backplane.com (8.11.6/8.9.1) id g2LJRlN00599; Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:27:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dillon) Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:27:47 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Dillon Message-Id: <200203211927.g2LJRlN00599@apollo.backplane.com> To: "Jim King" Cc: "David Greenman" , Subject: Re: Problems with large disk. (> 1 TB) References: <20020321191258.J64325-100000@woozle.rinet.ru> <200203211715.g2LHFeo21349@apollo.backplane.com> <007d01c1d108$fbbfa930$779a8486@jking> Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG : :"Matthew Dillon" wrote: :> Or, for example, you could take 12 160G disks, split each one into :> two 80G partitions (say 'd' and 'e'), and the RAID-5 all the 'd' :> partitions together into a 800G logical drive and RAID-5 all the :> 'e' partitions together into another 800G logical drive. : :What's the advantage of doing this vs. one 800GB RAID5 volume on 6 of the :drives and another 800GB RAID5 volume on the other 6 drives? Or was your :example just for illustration? Just an illustration, though a very pertainant one considering (a) the direction that drive capacities are going -- straight up, and (b) at least insofar as general read performance goes, the more spindles you have the better. So unless there are other requirements that prevent it and assuming one doesn't go overboard, I usually try to spread the disk load out at least a little. -Matt Matthew Dillon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message