Check out my first novel, midnight's simulacra!
13 drives: Difference between revisions
From dankwiki
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
! Name !! Setup !! Availability !! | ! Name !! Setup !! Availability !! MaxFail !! Max Rebuild !! Perf | ||
|- | |- | ||
| raid3z | | raid3z | ||
| Line 73: | Line 73: | ||
{| class="wikitable" | {| class="wikitable" | ||
! Name !! Setup !! Availability !! | ! Name !! Setup !! Availability !! MaxFail !! MinFail !! Max Rebuild !! Perf | ||
|- | |- | ||
| raid3z | | raid3z | ||
| Line 79: | Line 79: | ||
| 78.6% (11) | | 78.6% (11) | ||
| 3 | | 3 | ||
| 4 | |||
| 100% + fail | | 100% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 86: | Line 87: | ||
| 85.7% (12) | | 85.7% (12) | ||
| 2 | | 2 | ||
| 3 | |||
| 85.7% + fail | | 85.7% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 93: | Line 95: | ||
| 57.1% (8) | | 57.1% (8) | ||
| 3 + 3 | | 3 + 3 | ||
| 4 | |||
| 50% + fail | | 50% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 100: | Line 103: | ||
| 71.4% (10) | | 71.4% (10) | ||
| 2 + 2 | | 2 + 2 | ||
| 3 | |||
| 50% + fail | | 50% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 107: | Line 111: | ||
| 85.7% (12) | | 85.7% (12) | ||
| 1 + 1 | | 1 + 1 | ||
| 2 | |||
| 50% + fail | | 50% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 114: | Line 119: | ||
| 28.6% (4) | | 28.6% (4) | ||
| 7 + 3 | | 7 + 3 | ||
| 4 | |||
| 50% + fail | | 50% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 121: | Line 127: | ||
| 35.7% (5) | | 35.7% (5) | ||
| 7 + 2 | | 7 + 2 | ||
| 3 | |||
| 50% + fail | | 50% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
| Line 128: | Line 135: | ||
| 42.9% (6) | | 42.9% (6) | ||
| 7 + 1 | | 7 + 1 | ||
| 2 | |||
| 50% + fail | | 50% + fail | ||
| | | | ||
|} | |} | ||
Revision as of 12:08, 7 February 2022
What's the best setup for 13 drives? I don't need high performance (this will be mostly for archiving media), but very much do not want to lose my data. The drives are 18TB, and ZFS will be used exclusively.
| Name | Setup | Availability | MaxFail | Max Rebuild | Perf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| raid3z | 10 data, 3 parity | 76.9% (10) | 3 | 100% + fail | |
| raid3z + HS | 9 data, 3 parity, 1 spare | 69.2% (9) | 3 | 92.3% | |
| raid2z | 11 data, 2 parity | 84.6% (11) | 2 | 84.6% + fail | |
| raid2z + HS | 10 data, 2 parity, 1 spare | 76.9% (10) | 2 | 76.9% | |
| striped raid2z + HS | 2x(4 data, 2 parity), 1 spare | 61.5% (8) | 2 + 2 | 30.8% | |
| striped raidz + HS | 2x(5 data, 1 parity), 1 spare | 76.9% (10) | 1 + 1 | 46.2% | |
| striped raidz + HS | 4x(2 data, 1 parity), 1 spare | 61.5% (8) | 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 | 25% | |
| mirrored raid2z + HS | 2x(4 data, 2 parity), 1 spare | 30.8% (4) | 6 + 2 | 46.2% | |
| mirrored raidz + HS | 2x(5 data, 1 parity), 1 spare | 38.5% (5) | 6 + 1 | 46.2% |
14 disks
14 disks might be more attractive. I only list solutions without a hot spare.
| Name | Setup | Availability | MaxFail | MinFail | Max Rebuild | Perf |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| raid3z | 11 data, 3 parity | 78.6% (11) | 3 | 4 | 100% + fail | |
| raid2z | 12 data, 2 parity | 85.7% (12) | 2 | 3 | 85.7% + fail | |
| striped raid3z | 2x(4 data, 3 parity) | 57.1% (8) | 3 + 3 | 4 | 50% + fail | |
| striped raid2z | 2x(5 data, 2 parity) | 71.4% (10) | 2 + 2 | 3 | 50% + fail | |
| striped raidz | 2x(6 data, 1 parity) | 85.7% (12) | 1 + 1 | 2 | 50% + fail | |
| mirrored raid3z | 2x(4 data, 3 parity) | 28.6% (4) | 7 + 3 | 4 | 50% + fail | |
| mirrored raid2z | 2x(5 data, 2 parity) | 35.7% (5) | 7 + 2 | 3 | 50% + fail | |
| mirrored raidz | 2x(6 data, 1 parity) | 42.9% (6) | 7 + 1 | 2 | 50% + fail |
