Skip to contentSkip to conversation

array size

DISCUSSION Sharif Islam 4 participants 4 messages Dec 13, 2005 – Dec 14, 2005 MD RAID

lore
Share & tools
lore

Sharif Islam

author
#0 lore raw

Shouldn't the size of the array be around 760GB? It says spare device 0.

/dev/md0:

       Version : 00.90.01

Creation Time : Mon Dec 12 15:56:58 2005
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 586075008 (558.92 GiB 600.14 GB)
Device Size : 195358336 (186.31 GiB 200.05 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Update Time : Tue Dec 13 09:59:54 2005
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0

#1 lore raw

4 disks, 0 spare, so 3x capacity

586075008 = 3 x 195358336

ming

Quoted 27 lines · Sharif Islam

Shouldn't the size of the array be around 760GB? It says spare device 0.

/dev/md0:

        Version : 00.90.01
  Creation Time : Mon Dec 12 15:56:58 2005
     Raid Level : raid5
     Array Size : 586075008 (558.92 GiB 600.14 GB)
    Device Size : 195358336 (186.31 GiB 200.05 GB)

Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 0
Persistence : Superblock is persistent

Update Time : Tue Dec 13 09:59:54 2005
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

#2 lore raw
Quoted 12 lines · * Ming Zhang ([email protected]) [051213 16:15]:

4 disks, 0 spare, so 3x capacity
586075008 = 3 x 195358336

Quoted 8 lines · Sharif Islam

Shouldn't the size of the array be around 760GB? It says spare device 0.

/dev/md0:

        Version : 00.90.01
  Creation Time : Mon Dec 12 15:56:58 2005
     Raid Level : raid5
     Array Size : 586075008 (558.92 GiB 600.14 GB)
    Device Size : 195358336 (186.31 GiB 200.05 GB)

The description of the field is a little confusing. It should read "Netto Array Size" or "Available Disk Space" or some. Then it is clear that the last disk is excluded from the shown size.

Signature · 8 lines
Regards,

               MarkOv

------------------------------------------------------------------------
       Mark Overmeer MSc                                MARKOV Solutions
       [email protected]                          [email protected]
http://Mark.Overmeer.net                   http://solutions.overmeer.net
#3 lore raw

The last disk is not excluded, since the excluded space is used for parity (xor).

An equal part of all disks is excluded (the parity data).

However, the size is the same as 1 disk being excluded. :)

Quoted 40 lines

-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:linux-raid- [email protected]] On Behalf Of Mark Overmeer
Sent: Tuesday, December 13, 2005 12:10 PM
To: Ming Zhang
Cc: Sharif Islam; [email protected]
Subject: Re: array size

Quoted 5 lines · * Ming Zhang ([email protected]) [051213 16:15]:

4 disks, 0 spare, so 3x capacity
586075008 = 3 x 195358336

Quoted 1 line · Sharif Islam

Shouldn't the size of the array be around 760GB? It says spare device

0.

Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 6 lines

/dev/md0:

        Version : 00.90.01
  Creation Time : Mon Dec 12 15:56:58 2005
     Raid Level : raid5
     Array Size : 586075008 (558.92 GiB 600.14 GB)
    Device Size : 195358336 (186.31 GiB 200.05 GB)

The description of the field is a little confusing. It should read "Netto Array Size" or "Available Disk Space" or some. Then it is clear that the last disk is excluded from the shown size.
--
Regards,

MarkOv

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Overmeer MSc MARKOV Solutions
[email protected] [email protected]
http://Mark.Overmeer.net http://solutions.overmeer.net

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html