<a href="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=clk&zid=15220&wd=468&ht=60&pair=as" target="_blank"><img style="border:0px;" src="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=img&zid=15220&wd=468&ht=60&pair=as" alt="i" width="468" height="60"/></a>
Log in
::
Register
::
Not logged in
Home
Tags
Articles
Editorials
Stairways
Forums
Scripts
Videos
Blogs
QotD
Books
Ask SSC
SQL Jobs
Training
Authors
About us
Contact us
Newsletters
Write for us
<a href="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=clk&zid=15491&wd=120&ht=300&pair=as" target="_top"><img style="border:0px;" src="http://g.adspeed.net/ad.php?do=img&zid=15491&wd=120&ht=300&pair=as" alt="i" width="120" height="300"/></a>
Recent Posts
Recent Posts
Popular Topics
Popular Topics
Home
Search
Members
Calendar
Who's On
Home
»
Article Discussions
»
Article Discussions by Author
»
Discuss Content Posted by Steve Jones
»
RAID 5 Parity
18 posts, Page 1 of 2
1
2
»»
RAID 5 Parity
Rate Topic
Display Mode
Topic Options
Author
Message
Steve Jones - SSC Editor
Steve Jones - SSC Editor
Posted Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:06 PM
SSC-Dedicated
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 3:26 PM
Points: 31,425,
Visits: 13,738
Comments posted to this topic are about the item
RAID 5 Parity
Follow me on Twitter:
@way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1083711
happycat59
happycat59
Posted Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:44 PM
SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:45 PM
Points: 2,471,
Visits: 2,065
Mmm, terminology is getting in my way for this one. My definition for parity (rightly or wrongly) applies at the byte level (Parity Bit).
For RAID 5, I have normally used the term "checksum" which is the value stored on 1 of the 3 disks required to store a single value,
Post #1083719
Steve Jones - SSC Editor
Steve Jones - SSC Editor
Posted Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:51 PM
SSC-Dedicated
Group: Administrators
Last Login: Today @ 3:26 PM
Points: 31,425,
Visits: 13,738
A Better reference:
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc938485.aspx
Checksum isn't a term I've seen associate with RAID. Almost always things are listed as parity calculations.
Follow me on Twitter:
@way0utwest
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Post #1083722
Evil Kraig F
Evil Kraig F
Posted Thursday, March 24, 2011 8:56 PM
SSCertifiable
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 5:44 PM
Points: 5,677,
Visits: 6,124
Cat, it's for both, and same purpose. In a RAID 5, for each section of disk (I forget the break out) in say a 4 disk array, 3 have data, one has a parity to make sure the other three stay intact. Because of that parity, you can assume the data on the 'lost' disk while it's replaced, and rebuild it, due to reverse construction of the bit/bytes. Same concept, expanded further.
Lose two drives and it's game over though, as most folks are well aware. :)
- Craig Farrell
Never stop learning, even if it hurts. Ego bruises are practically mandatory as you learn unless you've never risked enough to make a mistake.
For better assistance in answering your questions
|
Forum Netiquette
For index/tuning help, follow these directions.
|
Tally Tables
Twitter: @AnyWayDBA
Post #1083723
SQLRNNR
SQLRNNR
Posted Thursday, March 24, 2011 11:40 PM
SSCoach
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 1:07 PM
Points: 18,733,
Visits: 12,332
Thanks for the question.
Here is another explanation that makes some sense.
http://riceball.com/d/content/raid-5-parity-what-it-and-how-does-it-work
Jason
AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
I have given a name to my pain...
MCM SQL Server 2008
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw
Posting Data Etiquette - Jeff Moden
Hidden RBAR - Jeff Moden
VLFs and the Tran Log - Kimberly Tripp
Post #1083749
UMG Developer
UMG Developer
Posted Friday, March 25, 2011 12:42 AM
SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Monday, May 13, 2013 11:21 AM
Points: 2,163,
Visits: 2,148
Thanks for the question Steve!
Post #1083768
Stewart "Arturius" Campbell
Stewart "Arturius" Campbell
Posted Friday, March 25, 2011 2:05 AM
Hall of Fame
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: 2 days ago @ 3:48 AM
Points: 3,125,
Visits: 4,311
Thanks for the question.
____________________________________________
Space, the final frontier? not any more...
All limits henceforth are self-imposed.
“libera tute vulgaris ex”
Post #1083794
Koen Verbeeck
Koen Verbeeck
Posted Friday, March 25, 2011 2:46 AM
SSCrazy Eights
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 6:51 AM
Points: 9,373,
Visits: 6,470
Nice question, thanks.
Luckily I had the Wikipedia page for RAID bookmarked, in case new QotD featuring RAID would arrise
How to post forum questions.
Need an answer? No, you need a question.
What’s the deal with Excel & SSIS?
Member of
LinkedIn
. My blog at
LessThanDot
.
MCSA SQL Server 2012 - MCSE Business Intelligence
Post #1083814
Duncan Pryde
Duncan Pryde
Posted Friday, March 25, 2011 3:40 AM
Hall of Fame
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Today @ 9:32 AM
Points: 3,046,
Visits: 1,306
Thanks for the question. Reading the article, I now understand RAID 2, 3 and 4 as well.
But won't we all be using
ZFS
in a few years anyway?
Post #1083844
happycat59
happycat59
Posted Friday, March 25, 2011 3:46 AM
SSCrazy
Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 9:45 PM
Points: 2,471,
Visits: 2,065
Craig Farrell (3/24/2011)
Cat, it's for both, and same purpose. In a RAID 5, for each section of disk (I forget the break out) in say a 4 disk array, 3 have data, one has a parity to make sure the other three stay intact. Because of that parity, you can assume the data on the 'lost' disk while it's replaced, and rebuild it, due to reverse construction of the bit/bytes. Same concept, expanded further.
Lose two drives and it's game over though, as most folks are well aware. :)
I believe that the data is actually stored on 3 disks...2 have the actual data and the 3rd has the exclusive OR of the other 2 disks. Using this, if you loose any one of the 3 disks that store the data you are after, the other 2 have enough information to give to retrieve the data. This basic pattern is used regardless of the number of disks in the array. When there are more than 3 disks, each chunk of data is still stored on 3 of the disks. The controller manages the allocation of disk space to ensure that all disks on the array are utilised.
Steve - whilst you may not have heard of checksum (Vs parity) in relation to RAID 5 , try searching google for "RAID 5 checksum". I do agree that you can view this as a "parity" but I am one of them dinosaurs who have been around since the days of punch cards, paper tape and magnetic tape. Parity back then was more to do with detecting error.
Post #1083847
« Prev Topic
|
Next Topic »
18 posts, Page 1 of 2
1
2
»»
Permissions
You
cannot
post new topics.
You
cannot
post topic replies.
You
cannot
post new polls.
You
cannot
post replies to polls.
You
cannot
edit your own topics.
You
cannot
delete your own topics.
You
cannot
edit other topics.
You
cannot
delete other topics.
You
cannot
edit your own posts.
You
cannot
edit other posts.
You
cannot
delete your own posts.
You
cannot
delete other posts.
You
cannot
post events.
You
cannot
edit your own events.
You
cannot
edit other events.
You
cannot
delete your own events.
You
cannot
delete other events.
You
cannot
send private messages.
You
cannot
send emails.
You
may
read topics.
You
cannot
rate topics.
You
cannot
vote within polls.
You
cannot
upload attachments.
You
may
download attachments.
You
cannot
post HTML code.
You
cannot
edit HTML code.
You
cannot
post IFCode.
You
cannot
post JavaScript.
You
cannot
post EmotIcons.
You
cannot
post or upload images.
Copyright © 2002-2013 Simple Talk Publishing. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy.
Terms of Use.
Report Abuse.
