<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 1+0 in HPE EVA Storage</title>
    <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995850#M52997</link>
    <description>Thanks</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:08:47 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Inter_1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2006-08-08T10:08:47Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Raid 5 vs Raid 1+0</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995847#M52994</link>
      <description>Hi&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;I would like to design the system disks for data warhouse and I don't know which type of RAID to chose Raid 5 or Raid 0+1. &lt;BR /&gt;Which should you suggest and why?&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Thanks&lt;BR /&gt;Taulant</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2006 13:29:37 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995847#M52994</guid>
      <dc:creator>Inter_1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-08-07T13:29:37Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 1+0</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995848#M52995</link>
      <description>Taulant,&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;This HP white paper discusses the benefits of each RAID strategy, it's quite a good read and should help you decide.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Personally I prefer RAID1+0 for almost everything, but it's horses for courses really.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;A href="http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/CoreRedirect.jsp?redirectReason=DocIndexPDF&amp;amp;prodSeriesId=377751&amp;amp;targetPage=http%3A%2F%2Fh20000.www2.hp.com%2Fbc%2Fdocs%2Fsupport%2FSupportManual%2Fc00386950%2Fc00386950.pdf" target="_blank"&gt;http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/CoreRedirect.jsp?redirectReason=DocIndexPDF&amp;amp;prodSeriesId=377751&amp;amp;targetPage=http%3A%2F%2Fh20000.www2.hp.com%2Fbc%2Fdocs%2Fsupport%2FSupportManual%2Fc00386950%2Fc00386950.pdf&lt;/A&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Jeff</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2006 15:43:29 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995848#M52995</guid>
      <dc:creator>Jefferson Humber</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-08-07T15:43:29Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 1+0</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995849#M52996</link>
      <description>I've done some hands-on comparison &amp;amp; RAID10 always outperforms RAID5 by quite large margin.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;It shows its strenght e.g. during rebuilding process - with RAID10 there is almost no performance loss, while RAID5 is impacted heavily.&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;What is interesting though, is the fact that IF you size your solution properly in the terms of performance (not only capacity) it may appear that you will need less HDDs for RAID10 than RAID5 (especially in random writes environment).&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;Rgds</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:01:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995849#M52996</guid>
      <dc:creator>raadek</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-08-08T10:01:43Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Raid 5 vs Raid 1+0</title>
      <link>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995850#M52997</link>
      <description>Thanks</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2006 10:08:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.hpe.com/t5/hpe-eva-storage/raid-5-vs-raid-1-0/m-p/4995850#M52997</guid>
      <dc:creator>Inter_1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2006-08-08T10:08:47Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

