Re: Clarifying RAID questions...??

Aslialkin wrote: > > Hi All; > I would like to ask you experiments about RAID 5 and disk subsystems. > We're currently designing our new production platform regarding migration > process. > I've been reading last postings and questions about performance problems > related with RAID 5. > A current plan from sysadmin using RAID1/0 for system dbspaces. > Rootdbs,logdbs,phydbs,tempdbs. > and RAID 5 for rest of the data dbspaces. > Is there anyone experienced similar physical disk design on platform like ours. > Or shall I expect a bottleneck on my read or write i/o? > Platform: > DEC 4000 series 4 CPU running 4.0d OS > Storage Works disk sub system apprx. 100Gb. > INFORMIX 7.3X DS > OLTP expected users 150-200. NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! PLEASE search the CDI Archives on the IIUG WEB Site for any of my dozens of diatribes against this storage system evil! With the low cost of drives today there is simply no excuse to not use RAID10, but if your org is really that dirt poor, and I admit to the very real possibility that it might be, then use RAID3 or RAID4. With hardware based parity these long ignored RAID levels are VERY practical and suffer from NONE of the problems that RAID5 does. Art S. Kagel