Results 1 to 20 of 20
Thread: RAID5 or RAID10?
-
10-12-2006, 02:00 AM #1Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Posts
- 64
RAID5 or RAID10?
I am looking for the dedicated server with some RAID set up but
which is better, RAID1, RAID5 or RAID10 if all of the cost/options is available?
-
10-12-2006, 02:05 AM #2Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Posts
- 1,317
It depends what you need it for....
-
10-12-2006, 07:04 AM #3Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- uk
- Posts
- 448
Generally the higher the number in RAID the better the redudency but this of course brings higher cost....
Rediscover online gaming Get Continuum / Subspace | Play Trenchwars
-
10-12-2006, 07:09 AM #4Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Apr 2001
- Posts
- 64
To minimize the risk of data loss and connectivity loss from HDD failure.
Any further thought? Any benefit of Raid10 over Raid5?
-
10-12-2006, 07:20 AM #5Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- uk
- Posts
- 448
The website for RAID goes into the pros + cons of each different level of raid here http://www.raid.com/04_00.html I guess it really depends on you situation as to which is more suitible. I dont think either is "better" than the other its more a case of using the right solution for the right problem.
Rediscover online gaming Get Continuum / Subspace | Play Trenchwars
-
10-12-2006, 08:28 AM #6Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Jun 2004
- Location
- Tampa Florida
- Posts
- 428
depending on the number of drives 5 or 10 could be better for data loss. Its best to understand how raid works before knowing what is best for you.
In general, with 4 drives or less, raid10 will be your best choice, but garner you the least amount of useable space. Larger than that, there are a lot more variables to take into account.Rock solid hosting and dedicated servers since 1998!
StabilityHosting Where stability and uptime are king!
-
10-13-2006, 12:34 AM #7Backup Guru
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 4,618
RAID0: Requires 2 or more drives; Capacity equal to N drives; Higher write speed, higher read speed, higher failure rate; Data is striped across the drives with no reliability feature, so each drive you add increases the chance of volume failure
RAID1: Requires 2 or more drives; Capacity equal to 1 drive; Write speed equal to one drive, read speed slightly higher than 1 drive; Mirrors the data across two (or more) drives, so that a single drive failure won't destroy the data
RAID5: Requires 3 or more drives; Capacity equal to N-1 drives; Slightly slower write speed, higher read speed; Spreads the data over the drives, with one block for parity so that it can reconstruct data after a drive failure
RAID10: Requires 4 or more drives (even number): Capacity equal to N/2 drives; Higher write speed, higher read speed; Mirrors AND stripes data, so that you can get the performance of RAID0 and the reliability of RAID1
There are other RAID levels, but these are the most common. As you can see, it depends on what kind of reliability/performance/capacity you need, as some levels require more disks than others. For basic reliability, you would use RAID1. For performance without regard to reliability, you would use RAID0. For capacity, you normally want RAID5. For performance AND reliability, you usually want RAID10.Last edited by bqinternet; 10-13-2006 at 12:38 AM.
Scott Burns, President
BQ Internet Corporation
Remote Rsync and FTP backup solutions
*** http://www.bqbackup.com/ ***
-
10-13-2006, 01:17 AM #8Newbie
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Posts
- 12
Whats the diference between RAID10 and RAID1+0
-
10-13-2006, 01:35 AM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- United States
- Posts
- 1,405
Originally Posted by firesharkTommy Tran - tommy @ vinax.net ::: VINAX, LLC ::: http://vinax.net ::: Since 2004
Premium Dedicated Servers and Colocation in downtown Chicago (350 E. Cermak Rd)
Premium Bandwidth, 100% Network & Power Uptime SLA, 24/7 Prompt Tech Support
-
10-13-2006, 12:31 PM #10Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Posts
- 306
Originally Posted by vantage255
-
10-13-2006, 12:36 PM #11Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Posts
- 3,944
Heres a good site...
RAID10 - http://www.acnc.com/04_01_10.html
RAID0+1- http://www.acnc.com/04_01_0_1.html
Raid10 is basically 1+0, meaning RAID1 then RAID0, raid 0+1 is RAID0 then RAID1.
Basically the same thing.
RAID10 will give you better performance over RAID5 but the cost is higher.
-
10-14-2006, 06:34 AM #12Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Location
- sydney.au
- Posts
- 248
RAID 5 is fine if you're mostly serving files. (Static web sites, FTP, streaming media, that sort of thing.)
If you're running a heavy database app, particularly one that does lots of updates, definitely go RAID 10.
-
10-14-2006, 08:10 AM #13Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Location
- PA, USA
- Posts
- 5,143
I think people should stop calling Drives Spanning as RAID0. There is no "Redundancy" in spanning drives, and thus, it does not deserve the "R". Perhaps just call it AID0.
Fluid Hosting, LLC - Enterprise Cloud Infrastructure: Cloud Shared and Reseller, Cloud VPS, and Cloud Hybrid Server
-
10-15-2006, 05:07 PM #14Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 224
Originally Posted by devonblzx
"RAID 0+1 is NOT to be confused with RAID 10. A single drive failure will cause the whole array to become, in essence, a RAID Level 0 array"
0+1 is probably a very bad idea for anything of importance
-
10-15-2006, 10:39 PM #15Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Nov 2005
- Posts
- 3,944
Well it doesn't cause complete failure if one drive goes bad just like RAID10...it just turns into a RAID0 when one drive fails...
-
10-15-2006, 11:48 PM #16Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
- Posts
- 224
Originally Posted by devonblzx
-
10-16-2006, 04:02 PM #17Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Aug 2006
- Posts
- 270
I can not stress this enough.. Raid 10.
Raid 5 is nice and all, until it starts to degrade, and recovering from one drive failure is like pulling teeth, and there is a 50% chance another drive fails, and you loose it all.
Raid 5 = Cheap way out, and keep fingers crossed.
Raid 10 = Much better redundancy, sleep better at night.
However one thing I do have to say is, some people think if they use a Raid (1,5,10, etc) that they do not need to make regular backups and store them on another server or backup NAS because they feel they are 100% safe with the Raid, however after working in many DC's I can tell you there are still tons of ways for disaster to strike.
1) Power glitch, fries all ( or majority ) of drives in a raid.
2) Raid card failure, writes bad data to all drives, your screwed.
3) Physical damage ( bad Tech at DC, hurricane, etc. )
SO backup!!!
-
10-16-2006, 05:48 PM #18Newbie
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Posts
- 5
IMO its Raid10 aswell, depends though.
-
10-16-2006, 10:32 PM #19Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Location
- PA, USA
- Posts
- 5,143
Originally Posted by SeriousServersFluid Hosting, LLC - Enterprise Cloud Infrastructure: Cloud Shared and Reseller, Cloud VPS, and Cloud Hybrid Server
-
10-16-2006, 10:45 PM #20Junior Guru
- Join Date
- Oct 2006
- Location
- UK
- Posts
- 217
Indeed either RAID5 or RAID10 are both good solutions. It's a good idea to stick to either 3ware 95xx or Areca RAID cards.