Running RAID in a Fedora System

Xose Vazquez Perez xose at wanadoo.es
Mon Dec 8 01:45:13 UTC 2003


Allan Metts wrote:

> This is an Adaptec AAA-133U2, apparently part of Adaptec's "Array 1000"
> family.
> 
> --*-- Anyone see any issues with this controller and Fedora support?

is it an aacraid board ?

> --*-- It sounds like the general consensus is that, with five disks, I
> should use RAID 0/1 with a hot spare -- provided I can live without 60%
> of my disk space.  If not, use RAID 5.  Everyone agree?

raid 10 or 01 = 1/2 of total storage
raid 5 = total_storage - 1_disk

but raid 5 only supports a failure in *one* disk, and the rebuild of the raid
is _very_ slow. There is big degradation if one disk is broken.
Raid 10 can supports 2 failures in differents set of raid_1 and degradation
with 1 disk bad is less than raid5.

IMO with this board you are going to get a low performance. It would be
better to try Linux_soft_raid 10 instead 01 of the board, plus 1 disk as
hot spare. But if you prefer the native HW raid, be sure that firmware of
the board is the *latest*

> --*-- In any case, I'm hearing that I shouldn't have to worry at all
> about recovery.  The array will simply chug along with a failed disk
> until I replace it.  And when I do, the replacement disk will assume its
> proper role without much help from me (or special software) on boot-up. 
> Am I oversimplifying?

if you put hot spare disks, then answer is yes.

> Can anyone point me to a basic RAID monitoring / diagnostic tool that
> would support this controller on Fedora?  This is a single,
> highly-visible server -- and my main interest is in actually using (not
> administering) this machine -- so nothing fancy or complicated is needed.

if it is a _aacraid_ board Adaptec has a monitor tool -> http://linux.adaptec.com
or http://domsch.com/linux/#aacraid






More information about the fedora-list mailing list