On 6/17/05, Dragan Cvetkovic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Andy Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 10:10:13AM -0400, Tom Vier wrote: > >> On Fri, Jun 17, 2005 at 03:44:32PM +0200, Andrea Ganduglia wrote: > >> > build RAID5 software onto 4 SATA HD (mother board ASUS P5GD1) but I > >> > >> raid 5 often isn't the best choice. checkout this link: > >> > >> http://www.baarf.com/ > > > > I would certainly agree that if you need the redundancy and don't > > mind buying N disks to get N/2 disks of capacity then RAID10 is the > > answer. > > > > However in an environment where writes are quite rare and there > > isn't a big budget, I don't really see a problem with RAID5 as long > > as the limitations are known. > > > > Concerning that the OP wants to use it for Backup PC, I would certainly > expect quite a high ratio of writes where RAID5 is quite bad. > > To the OP: does 200GB difference (4 x 200 GB RAID5 gives ca. 600GB of data, > mirror gives 400GB) means a lot to you? If the anwer is no, RAID 1+0 is > better for you, if the answer is yes, buy larger disks and go to RAID 1+0 > :-) > > If you have a hardware raid card, than the above doesn't really matter that > much.
I have chosen RAID5 because I need about 900GB but I have low budget. My configuration have 4 SATA disk mounted on ASUS P5GD1 without SATA RAID controller. Intel chiset provided onto ASUS motherboards in acconding with http://linux.yyz.us/sata/ it isn't harware RAID but "It is software RAID, provided by the BIOS on the card." I'm skipping RAID HARDWARE for RAID SOFTWARE for two reasons: 1) Backups can be made slowly, because it happen on night time. 2) I have more trust into RAID HOWTO that into bios features. And now... true theme of this post. I have NOT previous experience about SATA and RAID5 SW, theorically It isn't problem, but... can U reassure me about this questions? It driving me crazy! Thx!
