William Warren wrote:
I'm not a fan of RAID 5 at all since it can only tolerate one failure at
all. Go with raid 10 or something like that which is able to handle
more than one failure. Intermittent, uncorrectable sector failures
during rebuilds are becoming an increasing problem with
Christopher Chan wrote:
William Warren wrote:
I'm not a fan of RAID 5 at all since it can only tolerate one failure at
all. Go with raid 10 or something like that which is able to handle
more than one failure. Intermittent, uncorrectable sector failures
during rebuilds are becoming
From: Ross S. W. Walker Sent: May 25, 2008 08:56
Typically most vendors recommend a two-prong approach, keep the
database data files on a RAID5/RAID6 type array and keep the
log files on a RAID10 array.
I can not comment on most vendors but for the PROGRESS RDBMS RAID5
is definitely not
Hugh E Cruickshank wrote:
From: Ross S. W. Walker Sent: May 25, 2008 08:56
Typically most vendors recommend a two-prong approach, keep the
database data files on a RAID5/RAID6 type array and keep the
log files on a RAID10 array.
I can not comment on most vendors but for the
I can not comment on most vendors but for the PROGRESS RDBMS RAID5
is definitely not recommended. It will work but you will see a
significant reduction in performance. We strongly recommend that our
clients go with RAID10 (as in RAID 1+0). In-house we only use RAID10.
+1
Write performance of
Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
Christopher Chan wrote:
William Warren wrote:
I'm not a fan of RAID 5 at all since it can only tolerate one failure at
all. Go with raid 10 or something like that which is able to handle
more than one failure. Intermittent, uncorrectable sector failures
during
Nikolay Ulyanitsky wrote:
I can not comment on most vendors but for the PROGRESS RDBMS RAID5
is definitely not recommended. It will work but you will see a
significant reduction in performance. We strongly recommend that our
clients go with RAID10 (as in RAID 1+0). In-house we only use RAID10.
Scott Silva wrote:
on 5-22-2008 9:58 PM Bahadir Kiziltan spake the following:
You need at least 6 drives for RAID5. I don't know if Perc 4e/Di
allows configuring the RAID5.
Where did you get this bit of information? You can create a raid 5
with 3 or more disks.
I'm not a fan of RAID 5 at all since it can only tolerate one failure at
all. Go with raid 10 or something like that which is able to handle
more than one failure. Intermittent, uncorrectable sector failures
during rebuilds are becoming an increasing problem with today's drives.
Rudi Ahlers
9 matches
Mail list logo
