> Again, I've never worked with Linux's OS RAID, so don't take my word for it. But
>that IS the purpose for RAID 1 afterall. Well, Fault tolerance and performance...
>There is no faster drive setup than mirroring. (and no, RAID 5 doesn't even come
>close. (well, it does come fairly close on writes, but not on reads.)) It's just
>really expensive because rather than n+1, you have n*2 drives. And you run out of
>space for 'em pretty fast on a big array. So expect a performance hit if the server
>is heavily used...
>
Kevin, unless you have a very highend raid card, raid 1 is not going to
be faster than any one drive on reads. Only high-end cards allow you to
read for either drive, most don't do that.
