Re: Hardware RAID vs. Software RAID

From: Chuck Lucas <chuck.lucas_at_mspb.gov>
Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 17:54:22 -0400
Message-ID: <bn49q3$7tr$1@ngspool-d02.news.aol.com>

"Anna C. Dent" <anacdent_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:Ye%kb.79328$Ms2.67542_at_fed1read03...
> Chuck Lucas wrote:
> > "Daniel Morgan" <damorgan_at_x.washington.edu> wrote in message
> > news:1066587431.204277_at_yasure...
> >
> >>You are correct on all points.
> >>
> >>But what version you implement can make a big difference. I'd stay away
> >>from RAID 5 and vendor RAID
> >>implementations with numbers like 2 and 4.
> >
> >
> > What's wrong with RAID 5?
> With Raid-5 the redundancy information is stripped across all disks.
> For EVERY data block which is written to a RAID-5 volume the parity
> block must be recalcuated and also written to disk. For all intents
> and purposes RAID-5 doubles the number of write operations to disk.
> As the percentage of WRITE to READ operations increases available
> useful/application disk throughput decreases.
>

Wow! I didn't expect this much of a response. Thanx, folks, for the input. I, OBVIOUSLY, have some more research to do, huh?

But I did notice throughout this that it seemed as though you guys were talking about software RAID5. I'm using hardware RAID5...does that make any difference in your opinions?

Off to my research, now. Again, thanx!

Chuck Received on Tue Oct 21 2003 - 16:54:22 CDT