RAID

Xose Vazquez Perez xose at wanadoo.es
Wed Nov 26 19:53:25 UTC 2003


Douglas Furlong wrote:

> RAID0 = Two (or more) disks with data spread over them, there is no
> redundancy in this configuration

One note: there are two kinds of RAID-0, stripe and concat(linear).

> In a RAID10 set up, if you have any two drives in a single RAID1
> configuration, fail then the entire raid array is lost, as RAID0
> provides no redundancy (but can provide performance improvements).

with 4 disk: in a RAID-10 can fail 2 disks from different raid-1,
RAID-01 only can fail _one_ disk.

> I believe in a RAID 5 configuration, depending on the number of disks
> present in the actual array, you can have multiple disk failures and for
> the system to still be functional, so long as said disk failures are not
> next to each other. If the disks are next to each other, then there will
> always be a total failure, which is in my opinion is very similar to the
> multiple disk failures in a RAID1 causing the entire RAID0 to fail.

RAID-5 _only_ can fail one disk. And with more than 14 disk the chance
of errors is higher.

raid 5 is cheaper, but 10 is better in general.
-- 
HTML mails are going to trash automagically





More information about the users mailing list