Again, I have issue with RAID 5 being used willy-nilly for databases.
You can get complete reliability using RAID 0+1 configurations (which
also only require 2 drives instead of three), plus you will outperform
a RAID 5 solution on writes by a couple of orders of magnitude.
There is a weird perception, perhaps because "5" > "0+1" that
this makes RAID 5 somehow better. It is more *complex*, but it's
certainly not the ultimate solution that many people somehow
From: maxfield%one.ctelcom.net@Internet on 03/18/99 03:58 PM
cc: mysql%lists.mysql.com@Internet, scottm%pobox.com@Internet (bcc:
Derick H Siddoway/TC/TRS/American Express)
Subject: Re: fastCPU vs moreRAM
For reliability, try to get a controller that will allow you to Raid 5
the drives. This will require 3 drives minimum, but it gives you the
ability to loose one drive of the three to a hard failure and still keep
your data intact.