From: Allen, Brandon <>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 22:51:55 +0000
Message-ID: <A250F0C68C23514CA9F3DF63D60EE10E02B0B2_at_ONEWS31.oneneck.corp>

I'm curious why your reads were so much faster on the RAID10. All else being equal, I'd expect to see the writes faster on RAID10 vs. RAID5 (once your cache is exceeded), but not the reads. I suspect there was something else affecting the numbers other than just the RAID level. As with pretty much everything else, the correct answer on the RAID5 vs. RAID10 question is - it depends.

A couple other important factors that are often overlooked are that RAID5 can only tolerate a single disk loss while RAID10 can survive multiple failures, and RAID10 will still perform well in the event of a failure but performance will be severely impacted on the RAID5 until it is repaired.


-----Original Message-----

From: [] On Behalf Of Karl Arao

apparently the RAID10 was 2x faster..

Privileged/Confidential Information may be contained in this message or attachments hereto. Please advise immediately if you or your employer do not consent to Internet email for messages of this kind. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of this company shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it.
-- Received on Tue Nov 15 2011 - 16:51:55 CST

Original text of this message