Re: RAID5
From: Karl Arao <karlarao_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:54:48 -0600
Message-ID: <CACNsJndXnfki8hrajOXxOtsZVR2zKey0rbbLgmG6jaSk5kay1g_at_mail.gmail.com>
I've encountered a scenario before where the customer allocated 5 LUNs for the DATA
and 4 LUNs for the RECO
and then I asked him the RAID configuration behind those LUNs.. and he told me that the DATA are RAID5, then the RECO are RAID10.. well, I don't want to "argue" which one is better or faster but I let our decisions based on facts,numbers,figures
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 15:54:48 -0600
Message-ID: <CACNsJndXnfki8hrajOXxOtsZVR2zKey0rbbLgmG6jaSk5kay1g_at_mail.gmail.com>
I've encountered a scenario before where the customer allocated 5 LUNs for the DATA
and 4 LUNs for the RECO
and then I asked him the RAID configuration behind those LUNs.. and he told me that the DATA are RAID5, then the RECO are RAID10.. well, I don't want to "argue" which one is better or faster but I let our decisions based on facts,numbers,figures
Since we are just on the build stage of the RAC environment.. I insisted that we run some benchmarks against the RAID5 and RAID10 disks and whatever the results of the benchmarks will decide where we will place the DATA diskgroup.. luckily he has an open mind..
apparently the RAID10 was 2x faster..
See the results here
http://karlarao.tiddlyspot.com/#%5B%5BRAID5%20and%20RAID10%20comparison%5D%5D
--
Karl Arao
karlarao.wordpress.com
karlarao.tiddlyspot.com
--
http://www.freelists.org/webpage/oracle-l
Received on Tue Nov 15 2011 - 15:54:48 CST