![]() |
Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Daniel Feenberg wrote: > Notice that JBOD has the same rate of failure and storage capacity as > RAID 0, but only half the data loss on each failure. We find that > significant, but I never see it mentioned in the storage literature, or > in newsgroups. I've always heard the definition of JBOD being quite literal - just a bunch of disk. With nothing special about how they are logically arranged. But apparently the definition is controversial, as indicated in this discussion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:RAID#JBOD with a common second meaning being a concatenation of the physical disks into one logical volume. In Linux RAID terminology that seems to be referred to as Linear mode. It seems focus has shifted to LVM for this functionality. That aside, I'd be curious to know which setup, if either, would prove to be more easily (partially) recovered: a two drive Linear array or a two drive LVM set, if one of the two drives fails. -Tom -- Tom Metro Venture Logic, Newton, MA, USA "Enterprise solutions through open source." Professional Profile: http://tmetro.venturelogic.com/ -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
![]() |
|
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |