On Fri, 26 Sep 2008 12:18:51 +0200, Adrian Moisey wrote:

> If RAID5 is slow and you don't care about redundancy, then I would say
> RAID0 (or LVM) over the disks.

Just a quick test I ran using
dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/store/00/bigfile bs=1M count=8192
just to get a basic idea of speed:

Raid 5: 8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 302.948 seconds, 28.4 MB/s
Raid 0: 8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 27.2641 seconds, 315 MB/s

The Raid 5 will not be able to keep up with my network cards...

Regarding redundancy, If I were to use individual disks, I would have an 
extra management overhead, to ensure that each individual disk does not 
run out of space, but a single failure would not lose *all* my data.

Can I get bacula to automatically backup to multiple devices for a single 
job, to spread the backups in case of a single failure?



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Bacula-users mailing list
Bacula-users AT lists.sourceforge DOT net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users