> >For the OS / Mailboxes etc. I still want a fault tolerant set and was
> >thinking about a 3 disk set running RAID 5.
>
> no, RAID 1, RAID5 is the slowest
Are you talking about RAID5 in the sense of allowing the OS to control the
array or using hardware to control the array?
I've always found 3, 4, or 5 drives with hardware-based RAID to always have
better writing/reading abilities than a software-based mirror configuration.
Please visit http://www.ipswitch.com/support/mailing-lists.html
to be removed from this list.
An Archive of this list is available at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/imail_forum%40list.ipswitch.com/
