[cisco-voip] UCS C210 Replace 146 GB Disk in RAID5 with 300 GB Disk

[Charles Goldsmith]

I've seen one URE fail in a raid 5 resilvering process, years ago on a DG
system.  Had to rebuild and restore from backup, fun times.

I agree Ryan, on a TRC system and RMA a drive, you stick with it.

>From my reading on TRC, you can rebuild as a RAID 10 and get faster speeds,
but you lose some space in the process.

On my personal systems, I'm using RAID 10 everywhere.

On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com> wrote:

> As I’ve read and understood; it isn’t due to actual functionality though.
> It is as you say, due mostly to longer rebuild times (indexing a physically
> larger geometry than the rest of the array members, for a smaller logical
> geometry) and the risk (rare IMO) to the rest of the array (as a rebuild
> will stress the array and could cause other, near-death disks to fail
> thereby causing the array to fail). It also wastes the extra horsepower of
> the disk since the existing RAID can’t capitalize on the resources of the
> larger disk.
>
> So in a case of, would you go out and buy a new disk that way .... I’d say
> no; but if that is the result of a covered RMA, I’d say go for it.
>
> I’m no diskologist though ... just based on my own experiences of what has
> worked for me for the last couple of decades ... and I’ve never lost a
> server ... outside of that one time when my pants pocket snagged the
> release on the 2nd disk in a R5 on my way out the door ... bad memories.
>
> -Ryan
>
> On Nov 14, 2017, at 9:03 AM, Charles Goldsmith <wokka at justfamily.org>
> wrote:
>
> Keep in mind, RAID 5 is ok for smaller disks, but larger disks it's no
> longer recommended, but sadly, the best article about it is from Dell:
> http://en.community.dell.com/techcenter/b/techcenter/archive/2012/08/14/
> new-equallogic-raid-tech-report-considerations-and-best-practices-released
>
> With bigger disks, it's even said that RAID 6 is no longer good enough,
> due to large rebuild times in case of a failure.  http://www.zdnet.
> com/blog/storage/why-raid-6-stops-working-in-2019/805
>
> On Tue, Nov 14, 2017 at 7:41 AM, Ryan Huff <ryanhuff at outlook.com> wrote:
>
>> Reto,
>>
>> Seek/rpm speeds and media type (flash, sata ... etc) are usually what
>> matter the most for RAID disks. If your only difference is total storage
>> capacity, the bigger disk will usually work just fine, your just gonna
>> waste the additional 154GB of space (because the RAID will only provision
>> 146GB of that 300GB disk).
>>
>> Just remember on a RAID 5, don’t pull/lose more that 1 disk at a time
>> .... painful lesson long ago I share over beer every now and then.
>>
>> -Ryan
>>
>> On Nov 14, 2017, at 8:23 AM, Reto Gassmann <voip at mrga.ch> wrote:
>>
>> Hallo
>>
>> We have a UCS C210 Server with 10x146 GB Disks. One of the Disks failed
>> and I got a 300 GB replacement Disk from Cisco.
>>
>> Is that a problem if I replace the defect 146 Disk in the RAID 5 with a
>> 300 GB Disk?
>>
>> Thanks for help
>> Regards Reto
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-voip mailing list
>> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20171114/2d323749/attachment.html>