If you're looking for speed, choose RAID 10, but with that solution you can only withstand the loss of certain combinations of two drives. Speaking from a reliability standpoint, I'd only consider that being able to withstand the loss of a single drive. Not that that's a bad thing, the odds of more than one drive failing simultaneously are pretty low. Just keep an extra 80 GB drive on hand and offline, they're cheap. Steve > -----Original Message----- > From: fedora-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:fedora-list-admin@xxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Peter Kiem > Sent: Friday, December 12, 2003 5:22 AM > To: fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Raid-5+spare or Raid-10? > > > Previously I've used software raid-1 for my RH7.x servers and it has > worked extremely well. > > For this new server I am purchasing however I decided to get a 3ware > 7506-4LP raid card and 4x80GB drives. The server will do general things > like email, web, ftp, dns, etc. > > I'm going to try to install FC1 on it to see if the hardware is > compatible but will probably end up with RHEL for production use. > > With 4 drives, I can either do raid-5 with a hotspare or raid-10. Both > will give me 160GB of space and theoretically can withstand the loss of > 2 drives. > > Any suggestions as to which raid array type to choose? > > -- > Regards, > +-----------------------------+---------------------------------+ > | Peter Kiem .^. | E-Mail : <zordah@xxxxxxxxxx> | > | Zordah IT /V\ | Mobile : +61 0414 724 766 | > | IT Consultancy & /( )\ | WWW : www.zordah.net | > | Internet Services ^^-^^ | ICQ : "Zordah" 866661 | > +-----------------------------+---------------------------------+ > My current spamtrap address is est1203@xxxxxxxxxx > > > -- > fedora-list mailing list > fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
