|
Isn’t their chart wrong? It shows RAID 5 as “very
high” and “very high” while RAID 0+1 is only “high”
and “very high” which would seem to indicate RAID 5 is better and
uses less disks. Looks like a typo ??? From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Christopher Checca Here’s a good high level view of
RAID levels… http://www.raidweb.com/whatis.html I use their 8 drive SATA SCSI interface units
with RAID 0+1 with my SQL servers and RS/6000 AIX servers.
Performance is two to three times any DELL or IBM raid arrays I’ve used. Please note in real world usage I’ve
seen RAID 0+1 well out run any RAID 10 array. Christopher Checca -----Original Message----- Hello All: I haven't gotten any responses to any of my other
questions that I've sent to the group, hopefully this one will. I'm trying to spec out a new server and had a question
for the group in regard to HDD configuration. What kind of RAID setup
works best on a mid-size Imail installation? Is RAID-1 acceptable or is RAID-5
recommended? Also, would 15K RPM disks make a huge difference as opposed to 10K
RPM disks? Thanks, Jim Frasch |
- RE: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Christopher Checca
- RE: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Robert E. Spivack
- Re: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Martin Schaible
- Re: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Darin Cox
- Re: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Matt
- RE: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Robert E. Spivack
- RE: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Christopher Checca
- Re: [IMail Forum] New Server Spec... Matt
- RE: [IMail Forum] New Server ... Christopher Checca
- Re: [IMail Forum] New Server Specs Darin Cox
