> Careful here. If your workload is unpredictable, RAID 6 (and RAID 5) > for that matter will break down under highly randomized write loads.
Oh? What precisely do you mean by "break down"? RAID 5's write performance is well-understood and it's used successfully in many installations for random write loads. Clearly if you need the very highest performance from a given amount of hardware, RAID 1 will perform better for random writes, but RAID 5 can be quite good. (RAID 6 is slightly worse, since a random write requires access to 3 disks instead of 2.) There are certainly bad implementations out there, but in general RAID 5 is a reasonable choice for many random-access workloads. (For those who haven't been paying attention, note that RAIDZ and RAIDZ2 are closer to RAID 3 in implementation and performance than to RAID 5; neither is a good choice for random-write workloads.) This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
