esignation.
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> on behalf
of J Harris <jk.har...@live.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2016 5:25 AM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: RE: [NTSysADM] Re: raid 5? in 2016-
Sorry but that is the primary rea
it they backed out.
Jon
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On
Behalf Of J- P
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 8:22 PM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] Re: raid 5? in 2016-
well there was one more factor that influenced my
ent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 6:21 PM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: Re: [NTSysADM] Re: raid 5? in 2016-
If you don't have seriously high iops needs, I doubt you need raid 10. Jmho.
If I thought it was a site I couldn't get to quickly, I'd consider raid 6 with
2 hot spares. C
>
>
>
> --
> *From:* listsad...@lists.myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com>
> on behalf of Jonathan Raper <jra...@nwnit.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:27 PM
> *To:* ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
> *Subject:
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com <listsad...@lists.myitforum.com> on behalf
of Jonathan Raper <jra...@nwnit.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 12:27 PM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [NTSysADM] RE: raid 5? in 2016
Yeah, I've run into that as
with RAID 10
or 0+1 on an Oracle DB configuration. (and no, I don't remember which option I
chose, or why).
Jonathan
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On
Behalf Of Doug Hobbs
Sent: Monday, September 19, 2016 3:39 AM
To: ntsysadm@lists.myitforum.com
Subject: [
"but still raid 5? and no hot spare?" I've seen this more than once, There are
a lot of people out there that were taught old school and that RAID 5 is the
de-facto standard RAID setup so they stick with it for years and years!
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com
I always like to have a hot spare. But not having a hot spare might be okay if
they have a cold spare on hand and are willing to run with reduced redundancy
until it can be installed.
Part of the motivation for RAID 6 is the probability of errors occurring during
a RAID 5 rebuild. The
Really depends what it does and if you need the space and speed. Static
non-mission critical data that is easily restored that needs to be streamed
really fast would do well on raid 5.
From: listsad...@lists.myitforum.com [mailto:listsad...@lists.myitforum.com] On
Behalf Of J- P
Sent: Friday,
9 matches
Mail list logo
