1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

OK... RAID 10 vs 0+1

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Jellyman_4eva, Feb 8, 2006.

  1. Jellyman_4eva

    Jellyman_4eva Byte Poster


    Todays read whilst I should have been working...

    I have been reading about RAID, in particular RAID 10 and 0+1..

    After drawing some diagrams, I understand the differences and why RAID 10 is the preferred option in terms of redundancy and also in terms of rebuilding the data..

    I also understand that RAID 5 is slower than both of them for performance... but it wastes less storage performing the redundancy... sort of middle of the road option between no redundancy with speed, and redundancy with speed...

    But, what I want to know is if for example using a RAID hardware controller I set up both RAID 0 or 1 and then used software (I assume this is how this is done) to create the RAID 10 or 0+1... which one of these is actually faster...

    Also what is the difference between the stripe block size and the operating system cluster size??!!
    Certifications: MCDST, MCITP-EDST/EDA/EA/SA/ MCSA 2K3/2K8, MCSE+M 2K3/2K8, ISA/TMG, VCP3/4, CCNA, Exchange, SQL, Citrix, A+, N+, L+, Sec+, Ser+, JNCIA-SSL, JNCIS-SSL
    WIP: Lots
  2. simongrahamuk
    Honorary Member

    simongrahamuk Hmmmmmmm?

    Ok, in order to try and answer your question I have to go and do some reading up on RAID myself. Outside of RAID 0, 1, and 5 it's not something that I really know much aboout.


    I'm going to make an assumption, as I couldn't find anything to the contrary, that what you are suggesting would be possible, but also rather risky.

    I have in the past set up three disks through hardware RAID to be configured as both RAID 1 and RAID 5, or at least I think I have, its been a while! As the software only see's what you tell it to then it should be do-able.

    You could have 5 physical disks, Hardware configured to be shown as two disks, and then tell the s/w to Mirror them.

    No idea about this one, perhaps someone else can shed some light on the subject?

  3. d-Faktor
    Honorary Member

    d-Faktor R.I.P - gone but never forgotten.

    well, if i understand your question correctly, for one a cluster or the cluster size has nothing to do with a raid set. it's the way the operating system deals with the allocation of data on a disc, or should i say volume, based on the cluster size defined on the file system.


    while a stripe block is a method used mostly by raid controllers for distributing data over more than one disc.

  4. eyeball

    eyeball Nibble Poster

    You may know this...but if at all possible avoid software raid...it makes everything SLOW (uses processor power). Only use it if your life depends on it. Well that is my view on it anyway
    Certifications: A+, Network +, MCSA
    WIP: CCNA, MCSE+security
  5. Bluerinse
    Honorary Member

    Bluerinse Exabyte Poster

    Have you actually tested this theory out eyeball or is it a presumption? I know people prefer hardware solutions but I am not sure that the software RAID setup of Windows 2000/2003 servers is any more processor intensive than any other service they are running.
    Certifications: C&G Electronics - MCSA (W2K) MCSE (W2K)
  6. ffreeloader

    ffreeloader Terabyte Poster

    I don't know about speed. I've never read or heard anything about that, but I've both read about, and talked to people, who say do not trust MS's software raid because of their experience with it. It's too unstable and if it crashes it's basically unrecoverable even in configurations that are supposed to have redundancy built in. IOW's don't trust it with anything important.
    Certifications: MCSE, MCDBA, CCNA, A+
    WIP: LPIC 1
  7. Bluerinse
    Honorary Member

    Bluerinse Exabyte Poster

    I have to say that that is not surprising.
    Certifications: C&G Electronics - MCSA (W2K) MCSE (W2K)
  8. supag33k

    supag33k Kilobyte Poster

    Never but Never use software RAID in a commercial system - it basically is more trouble than it is worth for the above reasons...
    Certifications: MCSE (NT4/2000/2003/Messaging), MCDBA
    WIP: CCNA, MCTS SQL, Exchange & Security stuff

Share This Page