Linux most common config

Matthew Walker mwalker at kydance.net
Thu Oct 6 13:36:05 MDT 2011


I'm glad to hear someone else stand up against this. I've been trying to decide whether
to step forward. Now I will:

Down with Raid 5 (or 3 or 4). Raid 10 is the way to go. 5 is just not worth it. It
performs worse, and I have personally experienced near disastrous failures twice while
running it.

On Thu, October 6, 2011 1:27 pm, Nicholas Leippe wrote:
> I"m surprised to hear so many RAID5 responses.
>
> I used to be a fan of RAID5, believing the tradeoffs it proposes were
> reasonable. But after witnessing many near disasters (requiring down
> time to recover), I'm now a fan of:
> http://www.miracleas.com/BAARF/BAARF2.html
>
> RAID5 is just not worth the hassle, lower performance, and much higher risk.
>
> Disk is cheap these days, RAID1 or RAID10 FTW IMO.
>
> /*
> PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
> Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
> Don't fear the penguin.
> */
>


-- 
Matthew Walker                          HAM Call Sign: N7TOX
Kydance Hosting & Consulting, Inc. - http://www.kydance.net/
PHP, Perl, and Web Development - Linux Server Administration


More information about the PLUG mailing list