I believe that RAID 5 would be more efficient in it's use of disk space yet still retain the data protection. Basically my RAID 0+1 uses 2Gb of space to provide 1Gb usable, and yes, it's setup as one boot volume. I keep my mp3 and video collection on it.
Frankly, I'm not sure you would notice the performance difference. Unless you already have the drives that you want to use, I'd seriously look at a SATA controller. I have used a Sonnet model that would boot from a RAID with two drives. SATA drives are much more common these days. Maybe just get two large ones and setup a RAID 1 mirror. My choice was largely determined by the Xserve which has four drive bays and had to be PATA. --- On Sun, 3/21/10, Albert Carter <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you lose much in performance > between RAID 5 and RAID 0+1? I got a > brand new (factory sealed) Hard Drive Controller Card I > don't think it > does RAID but I paid like $20 for it off Craigslist. It > supports ATA/ > 133 since the default controller on board for the > QuickSilver is only > a ATA/66 maybe a ATA/100. Can you boot to RAID 0+1 if its > done as a > Software RAID? -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list To unsubscribe from this group, send email to g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words "REMOVE ME" as the subject.
