Carl Wilhelm Soderstrom wrote: > On 03/03 02:29 , Les Mikesell wrote: > >> The seek time for these may be the real killer since you drag the parity >> drive's head along for the ride. >> > The more drives you have in an array, the closer your seek time will tend to > approach worst-case, as the controller waits for the drive with the longest > seek time for a given operation. Does anyone know anything about > synchronizing drive spindles? I've heard of it, and I know it requires > drives that are built for it; but never worked with such hardware. > >
I was always led to believe that the more drives you had in an array the faster it would get. ie, comparing the same HDD and controller, if you have 3 HDD in a RAiD5 it would be slower than 6 HDD in a RAID5. Is that an invalid assumption? How does RAID6 compare in all this? Would it be faster than RAID5 for the same number of HDD's ? (Exclude CPU overheads in all this) Regards, Adam ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ BackupPC-users mailing list BackupPC-users@lists.sourceforge.net List: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/backuppc-users Wiki: http://backuppc.wiki.sourceforge.net Project: http://backuppc.sourceforge.net/
