David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
>
> Steve Fulton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes on 19 January 2001 at 16:59:33 -0500
> > I've searched the archives extensively, and I've learned quite a lot, but
> > I'd like advice on this question:
> >
> > Assuming RAID 1+0 is not an option (due to the expense), what level of
> > RAID is best for storing /Maildir's on a file server (that will be
> > accessible to the SMTP & POP servers via NFS). Redudancy is the big
> > issue, otherwise I'd go for RAID 1. The suits are pushing for RAID 5
> > because they don't know better - and won't listen.
>
> Um; 0 is striping, 1 is mirroring, right? I don't do this enough to
> be confident of the numbers. So if mirroring is too expensive, the
> only option available for consideration is RAID 5, parity. It has
> less redundancy than mirroring, but good reliability (survives loss of
> one disk).
You are correct. Zero (0) is striping, one (1) is mirroring and five (5)
is parity. The OPs wording is confusing, or he's got 0 and 1 reversed
in his head somehow (or a complete misunderstanding of RAID levels)....
For the curious (just the first hit I found from Google ;) ):
http://www.express-inc.com/docs/diskarry/raid.htm
GW
