this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2023
15 points (89.5% liked)

Selfhosted

61827 readers
507 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details. Tags [CBH] or [AIP] are required, see the links in Rule 8 for details.

  8. AI-related discussions and AI-involved promotional posts have additional requirements for tagging, as noted in Rule 7 and the AI & Promotional Post Expanded Rules post, and find example disclosures here.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

So I recently found out that I have sh*t my leg... I was about to set up unraid but just before dipping my toes I was told that the parity drive needs to be the same or larger in size, really wish I had done more thorough reseach before recently buying that 10TB HDD hehe...

My planned setup was; 250 GB - SSD (Cache) 1 TB - HDD (Parity) 2 TB - HDD (Pool) 10 TB - HDD (Pool)

So what are my option now that I have messed that up, what would you recommend? To go without parity or is there another way?

Any help is appriciated, I am still quite new to selfhosting/linux :)

UPDATE; I can trade the 10TB for two 4TB disks + the extra. Should I?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] tal@lemmy.today 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

You can set this sort of "redundancy with different-size drives without wasting a bunch of space" thing up at the block device level -- I understand that Synology's "Hybrid RAID" is a Linux system doing that. But you've got to be careful doing that; configure it wrong and you won't have redundancy.

I don't know, somewhat-surprisingly, of a software package that aims to manage a collection of disks to do this configuration at a high level, slicing up a collection of drives into smaller block devices and adding and removing disks and migrating data and such while providing guarantees that data has at least N drive redundancy.

That being said, even in such a configuration, you can only do so much. If you have one drive that's 10TB and the rest of all your drives intended for redundant storage sum to 3TB -- which is what you have -- you can't have a configuration that can handle failure of your 10TB drive and can store more than 3TB of data with redundancy, no matter how you slice and dice things. You're going to have to waste 7TB of space or store data without redundancy.

What's best to do is probably going to depend on how much you want to spend.