Prev: Admin w2k8 r2 DC from XP
Next: Corrupt or Missing Config.sys
From: Hank Arnold on 1 Apr 2010 05:15
I would *NEVER* base a decision like this on the reliability of the hard
drive. All hard drives will fail at some point.

With drives so cheap these days, I would suggest going with a 4-drive
RAID 10 array. RAID 1 is faster than this or RAID 5, but RAID 10 can
tolerate the loss of 2 drives, vs. RAID 1 or RAID 5.

The biggest problem with RAID 5 is performance. Not only is it slower
than the others, it suffers the worst degradation if a drive is lost.


Regards,
Hank Arnold
Microsoft MVP
Windows Server - Directory Services
http://it.toolbox.com/blogs/personal-pc-assistant/

On 3/31/2010 6:01 AM, ship wrote:
> Hi
>
> Our IT suppliers are telling us that hard disks are now so reliable,
> that RAID1 good enough for a local office database/file server
> (running Windows 2008 Server)? Or should we go for RAID5 ?
>
>
> All feedback gratefully appreciated.
>
>
> With thanks
>
>
> Ship
> Shiperton Henethe
>
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Admin w2k8 r2 DC from XP
Next: Corrupt or Missing Config.sys