Steve pretty much nailed it. One additional point:

YOU (meaning your company) need to decide if the risk of data loss dur to being unprotected during a RAID5 rebuild is high enough to take the performance penalty of RAID6. Obviously IF you lose a second drive during a RAID 5 rebuild it's 'where's the tape?' time. Not likely of course statistically but then someone does win the lotto now and then....

- Larry "DrFranken" Bolhuis - Personal Development IBM i timeshare service. - Commercial IBM i Cloud Hosting.

On 12/4/2015 7:46 AM, Steve Pavlichek wrote:

RAID6 is a little slower due to 2 parity drives but better protection.
I usually recommend RAID5 with hot spare

You also have choices of Performance or Capacity option when starting
RAID. Performance option will give you 2 RAID sets and Capacity will
give you 1 set.

Here's a link to Sue Bakers parity set Techdoc

-----Original Message----- From: Gad Miron
Sent: Friday, December 04, 2015 3:41 AM
To: midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Raid Configuration

To the Hardware guys

a quick one:

Due to replacing 3 SSDs installed for test puposes with (the original) 3
The BP is breaking the existing RAID5 set of 15 HDDs and is going to build
a 18 HDDs
RAID5 set (adding 3 HDDs)

My question, should we build istead a RAID6 set ?
what are the pros & cons?

This is a 8286 41A P8 machine with 18 283GB 15K discs all in the CEC
(plus 8 more in expansion 5887)
I believe that there is a EJ0P on-board controller .

So RAID5 or RAID6 ?


This thread ...


Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2019 by and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].