Re: Raid 5 vs 3

> The bosses already shot down Raid 0+1 because of cost and (to be honest)
> what seems to be sheer prejudice.

That's a shame because in my opinion, it's one of the best Raid options for Oracle databases.  

> Ok, if all this is true then why would ANYONE go with Raid 5? Raid 3
> seems superior in all ways. What am I missing?

For Oracle databases, you would be better served by NOT using Raid 5. As you know, Raid 5 is not well suited for write intensive operations. And you already stated that your database is write intensive. Even if your transactions are not write intensive, the database still is. Datafile headers, control files, redo log files, archive redo logs, temp tablespace, rollback segments.. All of these are written to during the life of the database. Putting these items on Raid 5 can kill your performance.

Personally, I'd go with Raid 0+1, or Raid 3, or no Raid. But stay away from Raid 5.

HTH,
Brian

-- 
========================================
Brian Peasland
Raytheons Systems at
  USGS EROS Data Center
These opinions are my own and do not
necessarily reflect the opinions of my 
company!
========================================