| Mental on 20 Oct 2003 10:40:02 -0400 |
|
On Mon, Oct 20, 2003 at 10:16:49AM -0400, Jesse Huestis wrote: > RAID 0 is not by its nature a performance booster. It is a great way > to add redundancy. A better performance advantage is acheived using > RAID 5. It has the reliability of striping your information accross > several drives with one drive able to fail before losing the array and > the performance increase of multiple drives read and write abilities. Uhh.... What? Are you sure you're not thinking of raid 1 (mirroring)? Raid 0 is striping, no mirroring, no redundancy. It exists for no other reason than performance. Raid 5 is striping with a parity volume distributed across the array. Raid 5 is certainly much slower than raid 0 on writes and it wastes a space on parity data. I want to take 2 drives, turn them into one big filesystem and read/write data quickly. If I was completely paranoid about non-replacable mp3/avi/video game high scores... I'd be into raid5. Definitions: http://www.winnetmag.com/Articles/Index.cfm?ArticleID=218 3ware benchmarks: http://www.3ware.com/products/benchmarks.asp -- Mental (Mental@NeverLight.com) I knew you once When you were young Before you knew What you'd become But that was then - And this is now You've lost your way - You've fallen down --Assemblage 23 GPG public key: http://www.neverlight.com/pas/Mental.asc Attachment:
pgpeWnPXn2vKM.pgp
|
|