On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:26 AM, J. Epperson <d...@epperson.homelinux.net> wrote: > On Thu, March 11, 2010 11:17, Dan Pritts wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 04:54:44PM -0600, John G. Heim wrote: >>> Has anyone configured a database server with RAID-5? Is it really a bad >>> idea >> >> http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/RAID >> > > Which says that unless money is no object, go with RAID 5. >
Actually it says if money is no object, go with RAID 10: http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/RAID#RAID_10 RAID 10 is the ideal RAID level in terms of performance and availability, but it can be expensive as it requires at least twice the amount of disk space. If money is no objective, always choose RAID 10! I would agree with the RAID 10 recommendation. I at one time did a lot of RAID 5 to try to comprimise price vs performance, but had several array failures resulting in having to restore from backup. Now, I put anything important on either RAID 1, or RAID 10. Basically I use RAID 1 if it needs to be reliable and RAID 10 if it needs to be reliable and fast. Preston _______________________________________________ Linux-PowerEdge mailing list Linux-PowerEdge@dell.com https://lists.us.dell.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-poweredge Please read the FAQ at http://lists.us.dell.com/faq
