On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Steve Meyers <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10/6/11 1:27 PM, Nicholas Leippe wrote: >> RAID5 is just not worth the hassle, lower performance, and much higher risk. >> >> Disk is cheap these days, RAID1 or RAID10 FTW IMO. > > Agreed, 100%. For I/O heavy workloads, make sure you use hardware RAID > with writeback cache (battery-backed, of course), although interesting > things are happening with Flashcache and bcache. >
If you have really heavy random I/O workloads, you might consider ditching rotating media all together. For really high sequential IO demands look at SSDs. For really high random IO demands, you might consider ditching serial buses all together and go with OCZ PCIe-based devices (or if you have the $$ and really need the max performance then look at fusionio) which make for very high IOP devices (and even higher sequential IO also of course). /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
