Ok, I'll probably go raid 0+1. The 500 gb drives are only $119 a piece. I can get a terabyte of data storage for $480, not a bad deal.
So if a drive fails, I only have to switch out the drive and it will rebuild the array, correct? -----Original Message----- From: Jim Davis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:01 PM To: CF-Community Subject: RE: raid 0 vs raid 5 > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew Smith [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 1:18 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: RE: raid 0 vs raid 5 > > I thought there would be a performance boost with raid 5, as well as > fault tolerance. I want the performance of raid 0, or at least a > performance boost over a single drive, but I would also like to not > have > to worry about a drive failing. > > Is there a raid configuration that provides a performance boost over a > single disk setup that also provides redundancy? RAID 5 won't be as fast as RAID 0 or even RAID 1... but then again I dare you tell the difference. ;^) You'll need four (identical) drives but you can do RAID 0+1 - a mirrored striped array. It works well, but you do need four drives (and the extra heat and power of that immediately increases your chance of a failure). Some boards support a hybrid "RAID 1.5" which does striping and mirroring on only two disks... it's a hack and non-standardized but I've not heard anything particularly bad about it. Jim Davis ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Create robust enterprise, web RIAs. Upgrade to ColdFusion 8 and integrate with Adobe Flex http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex2/?sdid=RVJP Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:241479 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
