Is RAID 0 that risky anymore for data storage (IMAP mail files) ? I figure that under normal wear and tear a drive should last about 5 years.
Does this sound right ? I have 3 IBM SCSI 18GB drives. With RAID 0, I get 51.5GB of storage space. With RAID 5, I only get 37 GB of space with 20% wasted overhead. RAID 0 and RAID 1 are less work for the disk volume than RAID 5. So in an ideal world, volumes with RAID 0 or RAID 1 will last longer than volumes in RAID 5. Thus, it would be less risk to use RAID 0 or better RAID 1 than RAID 5. --------------------- Ted Knab -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]