RAID-5 and database servers

Preston Hagar prestonh at gmail.com
Thu Mar 11 12:09:37 CST 2010


On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 11:26 AM, J. Epperson
<Dell at epperson.homelinux.net> wrote:
> On Thu, March 11, 2010 11:17, Dan Pritts wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 09, 2010 at 04:54:44PM -0600, John G. Heim wrote:
>>> Has anyone configured a database server with RAID-5? Is it really a bad
>>> idea
>>
>> http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/RAID
>>
>
> Which says that unless money is no object, go with RAID 5.
>

Actually it says if money is no object, go with RAID 10:

http://www.orafaq.com/wiki/RAID#RAID_10

RAID 10 is the ideal RAID level in terms of performance and
availability, but it can be expensive as it requires at least twice
the amount of disk space. If money is no objective, always choose RAID
10!

I would agree with the RAID 10 recommendation.  I at one time did a
lot of RAID 5 to try to comprimise price vs performance, but had
several array failures resulting in having to restore from backup.
Now, I put anything important on either RAID 1, or RAID 10.  Basically
I use RAID 1 if it needs to be reliable and RAID 10 if it needs to be
reliable and fast.

Preston



More information about the Linux-PowerEdge mailing list