>> On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 23:34:31 -0500, Roger Deschner <rogerd AT UIC DOT EDU> 
>> said:


> You probably want to avoid RAID5 for disk storage pools, whether
> sequential or random. That can really slow client backups, because
> RAID5 is quite slow for writing. RAID5 is really only good for
> read-mostly applications, so at least you'll migrate quickly. You
> probably want RAID10 instead, a striped set of mirrored pairs. (Make
> sure your RAID10 implementation is NOT a mirrored pair of striped
> sets, which is quite unsafe!) RAID10 is a less efficient use of raw
> disk space, but both faster and safer than RAID5.

And now for the counterpoint.

I've got ~3-4 TB in 6 15-disk SSA RADI5s, between them I fill a Gb
pipe coming in, if the clients on the other side ever get organized.
30MB/s peak per RAID is seldom the bottleneck.


- Allen S. Rout