> > > Raid 5 runs quite a bit slower when its degraded (missing drives). > > I hadn't heard this. Any idea why this is the case? I would > understand that you don't get the speed boost during reading > from the extra drive, but I would have guessed that it would > give higher read throughput than a single drive. > > Dan >
I believe it's because the data from the missing drive has to be recreated from the parity data on the other drives in the array and this reduces the performance significantly. From: http://www.microsoft.com/resources/documentation/windows/xp/all/proddocs/en- us/sag_diskconcepts_18.mspx "RAID-5 volumes have better read performance than mirrored volumes When a member is missing, however, such as when a disk has failed, the read performance is degraded by the need to recover the data with the parity information. Nevertheless, this strategy is recommended over mirrored volumes for programs that require redundancy and are primarily read-oriented. Write performance is reduced by the parity calculation. A write operation also requires three times more memory than a read operation during normal operation. Moreover, when a volume fails, reading requires at least three times more memory than before the failure. Both conditions are caused by the parity calculation." Greg
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list mythtv-users@mythtv.org http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
