vote
 |
|
RAID 10 was once known as the 'rich man's RAID' because it requires twice as much disk as a normal, non-redundant filesystem. In my use of RAID 10, I've always used more than double the disk space because I also use hot spare drives.
The extra cost is worth it in many cases, however, because of the excellent I/O performance and extremely high level of reliability of the filesystems. Now, that cost is far lower than it once was because the price of disk drives has dropped so far in the last few years. If you're not already using RAID 10, now might be a good time to reevaluate the option.
There are also the file systems /home, /opt, /var, /tmp, /usr/local and others to consider. When planning RAID, remember that usually UNIX filesystems like /home, /opt, and /usr/local obviously keep "slow-changing" data, and file systems like /var "fast-changing" data. And for /tmp, well, we don't need to take care of it at all after a system crash. So, I recommend that for /home, /opt, and /usr/local the best choice will be RAID 5 and for /var its preferable to apply RAID 0 or RAID 10. Remember, everything you decide about RAID configuration should come from your system targets and common sense.
| | |
| |
|
|
