←back to thread

NonRAID – fork of unRAID array kernel module

(github.com)
65 points qvr | 1 comments | 22 Jul 25 20:16 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
miffe ◴[22 Jul 25 20:42 UTC] No.44652742[source]▶
What makes this different from regular md? I'm not familiar with unRAID.
replies(2): >>44652869 #>>44653098 #
eddythompson80 ◴[22 Jul 25 20:52 UTC] No.44652869[source]▶
unRAID is geared towards homelab style deployments. Its main advantages over typical RAID is it's flexibility (https://www.snapraid.it/compare):

- It lets you throw JBODs (of ANY size) and you can create a "RAID" over them.

- The biggest drive must be a parity drive(s).

- N parity = surviving N drive failures.

- You can expand your storage pool 1 drive at a time. You need to recalculate parity for the full array.

The actual data is spread across drives. If a drive fails, you rebuild it from the parity. This is another implementation (using MergerFS + SnapRAID) https://perfectmediaserver.com/02-tech-stack/snapraid/

It's a very simple model to think of compared to something like ZFS. You can add/remove capacity AND protection as you go.

Its perf is significantly less than ZFS of course.

replies(6): >>44653100 #>>44653205 #>>44653256 #>>44654189 #>>44654558 #>>44655212 #
xcrunner529 ◴[22 Jul 25 23:30 UTC] No.44654189[source]▶
I currently use and love snap raid. I assume the reason for this project was for real time? That seems to be the only thing unraid improves on?
replies(1): >>44654258 #
1. eddythompson80 ◴[22 Jul 25 23:45 UTC] No.44654258[source]▶
I think that's mainly it. It does give you some peace of mind that you are never in an "unprotected until next snapshot" state. But if you don't care, then there isn't much else that I noticed.