Re: RAID 1 or 5 ?

Article View: comp.arch.storage

Article #434

#434

From: René Köhnen Wiesemes
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 00:00

33 lines
1636 bytes

Hi,

none of your suggested solutions will work
for 2 simultaneously HD failures:

RAID 5 solution will only give fault tolerance for
only one HD failure. In a configuration with one
hot spare (standby) disk this disk will be used
automatically when one of the HD in the group
failed. If two HD of the group failed simultaneously
all the data get lost.

RAID 1 (stripping) gives none fault tolerance at all.
If you mirrored two RAID 1 groups, only one part
can be out of order without data loss.

Hope this helps,
Ren�

"Kenneth Soh @ BTM Singapore" wrote:

> Hi,
>
> If I am interested in having storage fault tolerant up to
> 2 x HD failure, which option will be good ?
>
> Option #1 RAID 1 with 4 HDs, i.e. 2 pairs
> Option #2 RAID 5 with 4 HDs, i.e. 3 in group, 1 standby
>
> Please cc your reply to kensoh@pacific.net.sg
>
> Thanks and regards,
> Kenneth

Technical Details

Message-ID: <37A02675.23233EB8@sni.de>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References: <7nl85m$3nn$1@newton.pacific.net.sg>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII
X-Google-Thread: f4d7c,813a29bed80cb2f6
X-Google-Attributes: gidf4d7c,public
X-Google-Thread: 1144af,813a29bed80cb2f6
X-Google-Attributes: gid1144af,public
X-Google-Thread: 10e1c8,813a29bed80cb2f6
X-Google-Attributes: gid10e1c8,public
From: René Köhnen Wiesemes <koehnen.pad@sni.de>
Subject: Re: RAID 1 or 5 ?
Date: 1999/07/29
Message-ID: <37A02675.23233EB8@sni.de>
X-Deja-AN: 506534517
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
References: <7nl85m$3nn$1@newton.pacific.net.sg>
X-Accept-Language: de,en,fr
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Organization: Siemens AG
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.arch.storage,comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage,fido.ger.storage

Reply to Parent Message