Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 11:00:20 +0000 (GMT) From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk> To: Chuck Swiger <cswiger@mac.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RAID1 vs RAID5 [ was Re: 1 processor vs. 2] Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0403051058360.22978@mail.ilrt.bris.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <40475438.9020900@mac.com> References: <000601c4016d$cdb571e0$0a06a8c0@rekon> <200403040154.14373.danny@ricin.com> <40475438.9020900@mac.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 4 Mar 2004, Chuck Swiger wrote: > Also, RAID-5 performance degrades horribly if a drive is down, whereas RAID-1 > does fine... Using the algorithm you indicate below, RAID-5 performance would not degrade on the loss of a drive, it's start out that badly. > A five-disk RAID-5 array has to read 4 sectors and write five sectors if you > change one byte. Wrong; see previous response. -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 http://ioctl.org/jan/ Q: What's yellow and equivalent to the axiom of choice? A: Zorn's lemon.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.GSO.4.58.0403051058360.22978>