On 05/03/2012 05:20 AM, Linda Walsh wrote:
I disagree. 1) RAID is no substitute for regular backups. 2) RAID 6 even in hardware created a noticeable penalty, while RAID5 gets close to RAID0 speeds on READS and most WRITES.
True, but a good RAID can reduce the number of times you have to go to the tapes. I've heard that RAID-6 is slower than RAID-5, but I've never been able to measure the difference myself. I think that RAID-5 can lead one into a false sense of security. Once you have a disk failure you've used up all your redundancy. Now, when you replace the defective disk you are susceptible during the intense rebuild process to a second disk failure. RAID-6 gives redundancy for the all important rebuild. I think that RAID-6 is the choice if bandwidth and capacity allows. Regarding bandwidth, RAID-60 is great! I measured a write rate of 1.3-GB/sec on a 22 disk RAID-60 array recent.y. RAID-60 is a stripe of two or more RAID-6 arrays. Regards, Lew -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org