Re: RAID 3 / RAID 5

anasaz!qip.naomi@enuucp.eas.asu.edu (Naomi Walker) writes: >> >> >Um, was this with RAID 3 or RAID 5? It sounds like RAID 3's >> >performance characteristics. >> >> Yup - this was with RAID 3 - hadn't actually heard of RAID 5 before >> and am checking on that one. Could you (or any-one else) perhaps >> help with some info on the differences between the two ? >> >RAID 5 arrays have internal redundancy built in, so mirroring is not >necessary. You configure once spindle as a parity drive so that if ^^^^ Actually that would be RAID 4. In RAID 5 the parity information is spread alternately across all spindles in the array rank so as to avoid having the parity drive be a bottleneck on updates. Parity must be changed every time the underlying data is changed. >a drive goes bad, the data can be recreated from the parity drive. >This is similar to the fastback/virtual drive technology we use on our >Pyramid platforms. >-- > Naomi Walker (aka N7FSA) naomi@anasazi.com > Phoenix, Arizona > To get the full value of joy, > you must have someone to divide it with. ---Mark Twain -- Dick Wilmot Editor, Independent RAID Report (510) 938-7425