[ale] If your using large Sata drives in raid 5/6 ....

[Jeff Hubbs]

My research into the subject suggested that RAID6 would only have been 
marginally better (btw, it's eight drives).

On 2/4/10 9:59 PM, Brian Pitts wrote:
> On 02/02/2010 05:45 PM, Jeff Hubbs wrote:
>    
>> This is why I steered away from RAID5 and 6 for the file server I built
>> for my employer.  I intended to have a "big slow" SATA array and a
>> "small fast" SAS array - I planned to use 1+0 for the latter and 5 for
>> the former, but when I began looking into this issue I got skittish and
>> decided to go 1+0 for the big slow array as well.
>>      
> I'm curious, if you're worried about bad sectors in the "big slow" array
> why not RAID 6 (if you have at least 4 drives) or 6+0 (if you have at
> least 8 drives)?
>
>