Raid 5 (was: Mounting of Linux volumes)
chris.carey at gmail.com
Thu Dec 1 17:05:55 MST 2005
On 12/1/05, Ross Werner <ross at agilestudios.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, James Clawson wrote:
> > I will access the volume as root as you suggested. As for the second disk,
> > it was RAID 5, and your response was pretty much what I suspected. Oh, well.
> Since we're on the subject of RAID, what's the speed difference like
> between RAID 1 and RAID 5? Is that pretty much the only benefit of RAID 5?
> RAID 5 seems nearly impossible to recover from anything apart from a
> single drive failure--any sort of data corruption, or a power outage, or
> pretty much anything unexpected can render your data unsalvageable,
> especially if you're using software RAID ... whereas with RAID 1, you
> always have the option of just treating the disk like a normal drive.
Im no expert on the performance on these but as far as space:
RAID 1 - 2x40GB drives = 40GB
RAID 5 - 3x40GB drives = 80GB
You get more bang for your buck with RAID 5.
As I understand, RAID 1 will read from both drives simultaneusly,
making reads quicker. Writes go to both drives so its similar speed to
a single drive setup. Reads *and* writes on RAID 5 are quicker.
More information about the PLUG