I was originally going to only have 3 drives in a raid-5 but then I considered the card would take 4 and could hot-spare the 4th and it wasn't *that* much more to get a 4th drive. Might as well build this baby properly! But then with 4 drives I could raid-10 so I was wondering... > heavy write situation, I'd definitely chose RAID 1+0. Given the mix > you specified, I'd go with RAID-5. The system probably won't be too heavy on either so I doubt I would see a difference either way I guess. > I've said it here before, but I'll say it again. I have seen 2 disks die > in a RAID-5 set - and those failures happened close together. The first Yeah I am probably more concerned with reliablity so a raid-5 + hotspare would be more resilient than a raid-10. But your first case when you had two failures close together and the raid-5 + hotspare saved you is the sort of case I am looking for. Thanks :) -- Regards, +-----------------------------+---------------------------------+ | Peter Kiem .^. | E-Mail : <zordah@xxxxxxxxxx> | | Zordah IT /V\ | Mobile : +61 0414 724 766 | | IT Consultancy & /( )\ | WWW : www.zordah.net | | Internet Services ^^-^^ | ICQ : "Zordah" 866661 | +-----------------------------+---------------------------------+ My current spamtrap address is est1203@xxxxxxxxxx -- redhat-list mailing list unsubscribe mailto:redhat-list-request@xxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list