Linux most common config

Matthew Walker mwalker at
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:
> RAID5 is just not worth the hassle, lower performance, and much higher risk.
> Disk is cheap these days, RAID1 or RAID10 FTW IMO.
> /*
> PLUG:, #utah on
> Unsubscribe:
> Don't fear the penguin.
> */

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

More information about the PLUG mailing list