searching raid 6 card working with fedora 23

[thibaut noah]

I'm not gonna use lvm or mdadm.
I choose zfs.
I will probably end up buying a little server since i cannot find
compatible hardware cheaper than an full server...
On Mon, 1 Feb 2016 at 04:59, Chris Murphy <lists at colorremedies.com> wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 7:05 AM, Roberto Ragusa <mail at robertoragusa.it>
> wrote:
> > On 01/22/2016 01:49 PM, thibaut noah wrote:
> >> Hello, all in the title, i'm sick of loosing hours trying to get
> hardware working with super outdated drivers (tech support not helping) so
> if anyone knows a raid card compatible with raid 6 AND that will work on
> fedora 23 please by all means share it.
> >> Price is not relevant, i can go up to 300euros/dollars if needed, i
> just want something that works for sure.
> >
> > Do not dismiss the SoftwareRAID option too easily.
> > Nothing is better than SoftwareRAID in terms of reliability, data
> unlocking and total
> > control of what's happening at your data.
> > Consider that with $300 you can seriously upgrade your system and let
> > it manage RAID by itself without losing performance.
>
> The caveat is that with this level of control comes quite a bit of a
> learning curve. There are lots of gotchas, possible the biggest two
> are:
>
> 1. SCT ERC value per drive must be less than that of the SCSI command
> timer. If this is not true the misconfiguration will prevent bad
> sectors from being fixed up by md. So it's important to get either
> enterprise drives that have SCT ERC already configured with ~ 7 second
> recovery, or buy drives with a configurable time. 'smartctl -l scterc
> <dev>' is the way to find out. Both the SCT ERC and SCSI command timer
> are per device and aren't persistent. This advice applies to md/mdadm,
> lvm, and Btrfs raids.
>
> 2. Separately backup mdadm.conf, and the mdadm superblock (that's
> mdadm -E) for each drive.
>
> 3. Bonus, don't follow advice on the web about using mdadm -C to
> recreate a broken array. Go the linux-raid@ list and ask for help
> first.  Many users end up with total data loss of otherwise
> recoverable arrays because they followed this absurd advice to
> recreate arrays rather than force assemble.
>
> If you are familiar with LVM, then it's got a neat edge over mdadm:
> each LV can have its own raid level. So you can create linear "throw
> away" LVs, or more scalable raid10 LVs, or slower but more space
> efficient raid6 LVs. So if you expect to want different redundancy
> levels, or make changes frequently, you might prefer LVM. But, it
> still doesn't have all the features mdadm offers, so you'll want to
> make a must haves list and check both out.
>
>
>
>
> --
> Chris Murphy
> --
> users mailing list
> users at lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users
> Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
> Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20160201/b5e43ce7/attachment-0001.html>