On Monday, December 08, 2003 10:27, ART KAGEL, BLOOMBERG/ 65E 55TH wrote: > It has become apparent to me, based on the under informed > recommendations and assertions being made recently to people requesting > guidance about how to structure their disk arrays, that I need to post > my NO RAID5 ranting here as I have in other places. <snip> > To put things into perspective: If a drive costs $1000US (and most are far > less expensive than that) then switching from a 4 pair RAID10 array to a 5 > drive RAID5 array will save 3 drives or $3000US. What is the cost of > overtime, wear and tear on the technicians, DBAs, managers, and customers > of even a recovery scare? What is the cost of reduced performance and > possibly reduced customer satisfaction? Finally what is the cost of lost > business if data is unrecoverable? I maintain that the drives are FAR > cheaper! Thanks, Art -- that's as good an analysis as I've ever read. It also makes a compelling business case, but what, in your opinion, is optimum for a home installation where the *integrity* of RAID is desired, but at minimal cost (keeping in mind that many of us are more than willing to trade transactions per second for ultimate integrity). Software- or hardware-based RAID, and what configuration? Best regards, -- John Miller Retired from all that, but still playing...
