Subject: Re: RAIDFrame or CCD? (WAS Re: ccd0c weirdness)
To: None <thorpej@shagadelic.org>
From: Mocha <netbsd_alpha@yahoo.com>
List: port-alpha
Date: 03/08/2000 22:50:08
so i can't lump a bunch of drives together (same size etc) and make one 
huge virtual drive with raidframe?

At 08:08 PM 3/8/00 -0800, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
>On Wed, Mar 08, 2000 at 09:52:49PM -0600, Mocha wrote:
>
>  > While we are on the topic of CCD, which is performs better and more
>  > stabble? ccd or raidframe?
>
>Depends on what you want.  ccd and raidframe are both perfectly reasonable
>and stable for striping.  But that's all ccd does (well, it also concatenates,
>which raidframe *doesn't* do, but no one really uses that feature all that
>much :-)
>
>ccd is considerably smaller, so if all you need is striping, it's a pretty
>good bet.  It doesn't have the whizbang features like autoconfiguration,
>etc., but it does stripe and does a pretty good job of it :-)
>
>--
>         -- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@shagadelic.org>