I don't know if some vendors do it differently, but distributed parity
*IS* pretty typical for RAID 5

> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 14:56:50 -0500 (CDT), Nate Carlson
> <natecars at real-time.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 18 Aug 2004, smac at visi.com wrote:
>> > It depends on whose raid controller you are using.
>> >
>> > If it's a newer HP/Compaq controller you can have 2 drives fail
>> replace
>> > the failed drives one at a time "HOT" and not miss a read or write.
>>
>> Huh?
>>
>> RAID5 means 1 parity drive, so if two drives fail and you don't have a
>> hot
>> spare (or if the second drive fails before the spare has been fully
>> brought into service), you will (by definition) lose the array. Doesn't
>> matter who made the controllers.
>>
>> Or are you talking about RAID6, where you have two parity drives?
>
> Actually, according to this site <http://www.acnc.com/04_01_05.html>,
> RAID5 is distributed parity. Perhaps this is vendor-specific though.
> Effectively, this leads to "one parity drive". (X drives of size N
> results in X parity slices of size N/X, one per drive, which results
> in usable storage space equivalent to XN - N .)
>
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
> Help beta test TCLUG's potential new home: http://plone.mn-linux.org
> Got pictures for TCLUG? Beta test http://plone.mn-linux.org/gallery
> tclug-list at mn-linux.org
> https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list
>



_______________________________________________
TCLUG Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota
Help beta test TCLUG's potential new home: http://plone.mn-linux.org
Got pictures for TCLUG? Beta test http://plone.mn-linux.org/gallery
tclug-list at mn-linux.org
https://mailman.real-time.com/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list