RAID 5 vs. RAID 10. Your thoughts.

[Jack Battiste]

^^ Sounds good. I actually use both RAID-5 and RAID-10. My workstation houses A four drive RAID-10 internally which store my current projects. In the event of a drive failure I want the quickest re-build possible with minimal deadline busting downtime. I have two 4 drive RAID-5 arrays for hourly back ups (OWC QX2 connected via PCIe SSD port). One BackUp is always running, the other I update once per week and store off-studio as theft and fire insurance. So that’s three copies of everything. Perhaps a bit over the top by many standards but works for me!

Jack Battiste
http://www.BattisteCreative.com
Retouching, Illustration & CGI

[Tangier Clarke]

Yeah, that’s what I am doing as well – Raid 10 on a 4-drive system for my current projects and I have it that way for the same reasons as you.

Tangier

[Russ D’arensbourg]

[Tangier Clarke] ”
Both of you feel that way even after reading the article at this link below?:

https://www.miracleas.com/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt“

That appears to be an article from ‘Battle Against Any Raid Five’ folks. Hardly impartial. I notice a couple interesting things here.
More than one reference to databases and such. No mention of heavy media storage usage.
Also the linked article, and several others linked from their homepage return 404 errors. Maybe they lost their storage?

At my old job at NBC we lost a raid 5 array while I was on vaction. After recovering the data from backup (remotely) we specced another larger raid 5 array. With a robotic tape backup.