RE: Informix and RAID

We use IBM Shark (the 800 model) which can do both RAID5 & 10. For very sequential I/O RAID5 is even faster than RAID10 (as quoted by IBM). This, i think, is because of the physical configuration of the disks in groups. The maximum number of disks participating in a RAID configuration is 8. Hence RAID10 gives you a stripe of 4 disks, and RAID5 gives you a stripe of 7 disks (3 and 6 resp. when the hot spare is carried in the group). So there's a case where RAID5 gets close to, and some times even beats, RAID10 :-! > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-informix-list@iiug.org > [mailto:owner-informix-list@iiug.org] On Behalf Of Art S. Kagel > Sent: 14 December 2004 17:25 > To: informix-list@iiug.org > Subject: Re: Informix and RAID > > Db Solution wrote: > > I'm sorry but I think you are wrong. > > > > I repeat for small/medium installations RAID 5 is a OK > solution. Back > > in the day I personally used it and was satisfied with it. A lot of > > customers are still using it are happy with it. > > > Lots of folk use LSD too, doesn't make it something I'd > recommend or use > myself. In fact it reminds my alot of RAID5. When it's good > it's good. > But, when you crash it can be fatal or you could lose your mind! > > Check out the BAARF site. There are lots of brief "I didn't > believe until I > lost a second RAID5 disks before the first one rebuit. No > more RAID5 for > me." testimonials on the membership list page. Also, let me > as everyone > whose been bitten by RAID5: Please post a short war story to > enlighten Db. > You can read mine in my RAID5 Rant on BAARF. > > Art S. Kagel > Disclaimer http://www.shoprite.co.za/disclaimer.html sending to informix-list