4 ms·
I don't see any suggestions for a replacement technology.
by elf_m_sternberg 12y ago
I don't see any suggestions for a replacement technology.
- verbatim 12y agoRAID-6 and RAID-10 are the usual go-tos.
- oofabz 12y agoI use RAID-Z, a feature of ZFS. It works great.
- barrkel 12y agoIt's slightly better than hardware raid5, but raidz2 is much better, and raid10 (also possible with zfs) is much faster as well as more reliable.
- kenko 12y agoYou didn't look, apparently. Even the URL of the "Why should I not use RAID 5?" gives it away: http://www.miracleas.com/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt http://www.miracleas.com/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt And it ends: "Conclusion? For safety and performance favor RAID10 first, RAID3 second,RAID4 third, and RAID5 last!"
- acjohnson55 12y ago"You didn't look, apparently"? Come on, don't be a jerk. I had the same question. A well written piece doesn't force you to read the references for the actual thesis. How do I know that link on the side isn't one of the pointless arguments the author quoted? Maybe it makes sense upon first read to someone with a lot of context, but as a home page of an initiative (movement? project?) it doesn't do a very good job of explaining what it's advocating for.