-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 12/07/06 18:52, Mike McCarty wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: >>>> [snip] >>> One way of doing RAID 5 with three discs is to write data to >>> each of two discs, and write the bitwise XOR of the data on >>> the two discs to a third. This requires no special >>> controller, it simply requires a tiny program. Here's one in >>> completely portable C: >> >> >> Separate parity disk is RAID-4, not -5. > > Not according to my information. > > See http://www.sohoconsult.ch/raid/raid.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID#RAID_4 A RAID 4 uses block-level striping with a dedicated parity disk. RAID 4 looks similar to RAID 5 except that it does not use distributed parity, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID#RAID_5 A RAID 5 uses block-level striping with parity data distributed across all member disks. This is how it is implemented on the "enterprise" systems we have at work. What your code looks like is RAID-3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID#RAID_3 A RAID 3 uses byte-level striping with a dedicated parity disk. RAID 3 is very rare in practice. One of the side-effects of RAID 3 is that it generally cannot service multiple requests simultaneously. This comes about because any single block of data will, by definition, be spread across all members of the set and will reside in the same location. So, any I/O operation requires activity on every disk. [snip] >> What you've done is create a parity disk. Useful, but not >> RAID. > > Pardon? Perhaps you are using a definition of RAID I'm not > familiar with. "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Discs" (some have > changed that to "Independent".) > > I'll admit that this is not the usual way it is implemented, but > it is certainly RAID to my way of thinking, and conforms to the > definitions I've seen, and uses the same kind of redundant data. Integral to the implementation of RAID is that the disk is divided into large blocks, and there are parity blocks for data blocks. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA Is "common sense" really valid? For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins are mud people. However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFeM/YS9HxQb37XmcRAh7wAKCAG9+Mfgv7f740CX8Sop0LshhnUgCdG5aK oM6sRxLI9yjpBgEqyvOQq5Y= =FbkC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
