Am Montag, 13. März 2006 22:40 schrieb Andrew Lentvorski: > > First question: Why RAID?
Hardware failure protection. > > RAID invokes a bunch of problems and management that should probably be > avoided unless you have a good reason. Is this for backups? Lack of Backups...? How does raid help backing up data anyway? > size on drives? eg. need greater than 300-400GB in one partition? > Reliability? How valuable is staying up? > > Second question: Why RAID 5? Why not something like RAID 10? 1. Try expanding a raid10 by adding drives. 2. array cap on 5: (n-1)*disk cap array cap on 10: 50% of overall disk cap. in other words 50% loss. > > RAID 5 hurts write performance pretty badly even with hardware cards. Areca puts over 400MB/s writing depending on disk count and type... But anyway, performance is lower ranking, hardware failure protection is top priority. > And RAID 5 only protects against 1 drive failure until you rebuild the > array. Multiple drive failures are no longer uncommon. If you were unclever enough to buy all the same disks from the same manufacturing date... yes. Anyway - how about Dawicontrol and HighPoint? -- -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GCS d--(+)@ s-:+ a- C+++(++++) UL+>++++ P+>++ L+++>++++ E-- W++ N o? K- w--(---) !O M+ V- PS++(+) PE(-) Y++ PGP t++(---)@ 5 X+(++) R+(++) tv--(+)@ b++(+++) DI+++ D G++ e* h>++ r%>* y? ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ http://www.stop1984.com http://www.againsttcpa.com -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
