Aaron Toponce put forth on 7/12/2010 6:56 PM: > The argument is not whether Linux software RAID 10 is standard or not, > but the requirement of the number of disks that Linux software RAID > supports. In this case, it supports 2+ disks, regardless what its > "effectiveness" is.
Yes, it is the argument. The argument is ensuring _accurate_ information is presented here for the benefit of others who will go searching for this information. The _accurate_ information is that Linux software md RAID 10 on anything less than 4 disks, or using the md RAID 10 "F2" layout on any number of disks, is not standard RAID 10. That is a very important distinction to make, and that's the reason I'm making it. That's what the current "argument" is about. I made the statement that you can't run RAID 10 on 3 disks, and I and the list, were told that the information I presented was "incorrect". It wasn't incorrect at all. The information presented in rebuttal to it is what was incorrect. I'm setting the record straight. Now, you can argue what RAID 10 is from now until you are blue in the face, and the list is tired of hearing it. But that won't change the industry definition of RAID 10. It's been well documented for over 15 years and won't be changing any time soon. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4c3bb29b.20...@hardwarefreak.com
