≡ Menu

raid 5 array

RAID 5 vs RAID 10: Recommended RAID For Safety and Performance

A Redundant Array of Independent Drives (or Disks), also known as Redundant Array of Inexpensive Drives (or Disks) (RAID) is an term for data storage schemes that divide and/or replicate data among multiple hard drives. RAID can be designed to provide increased data reliability or increased I/O performance, though one goal may compromise the other. There are 10 RAID level. But which one is recommended for data safety and performance considering that hard drives are commodity priced?

I did some research in last few months and based upon my experince I started to use RAID10 for both Vmware / XEN Virtualization and database servers. A few MS-Exchange and Oracle admins also recommended RAID 10 for both safety and performance over RAID 5.

Quick RAID 10 overview (raid 10 explained)

RAID 10 = Combining features of RAID 0 + RAID 1. It provides optimization for fault tolerance.

RAID 0 helps to increase performance by striping volume data across multiple disk drives.

RAID 1 provides disk mirroring which duplicates your data.

In some cases, RAID 10 offers faster data reads and writes than RAID 5 because it does not need to manage parity.

Fig.01: Raid 10 in action

Fig.01: Raid 10 in action

RAID 5 vs RAID 10

From Art S. Kagel research findings:

If a drive costs $1000US (and most are far less expensive than that) then switching from a 4 pair RAID10 array to a 5 drive RAID5 array will save 3 drives or $3000US. What is the cost of overtime, wear and tear on the technicians, DBAs, managers, and customers of even a recovery scare? What is the cost of reduced performance and possibly reduced customer satisfaction? Finally what is the cost of lost business if data is unrecoverable? I maintain that the drives are FAR cheaper! Hence my mantra:

Is RAID 5 Really a Bargain?

Cary Millsap, manager of Hotsos LLC and the editor of Hotsos Journal found the following facts - Is RAID 5 Really a Bargain?":

  • RAID 5 costs more for write-intensive applications than RAID 1.
  • RAID 5 is less outage resilient than RAID 1.
  • RAID 5 suffers massive performance degradation during partial outage.
  • RAID 5 is less architecturally flexible than RAID 1.
  • Correcting RAID 5 performance problems can be very expensive.

My practical experience with RAID arrays configuration

To make picture clear, I'm putting RAID 10 vs RAID 5 configuration for high-load database, Vmware / Xen servers, mail servers, MS - Exchange mail server etc:

RAID LevelTotal array capacityFault toleranceRead speedWrite speed
500GB x 4 disks
1000 GB1 disk4X2X
500GB x 3 disks
1000 GB1 disk2XSpeed of a RAID 5 depends upon the controller implementation

You can clearly see RAID 10 outperforms RAID 5 at fraction of cost in terms of read and write operations.

A note about backup

Any RAID level will not protect you from multiple disk failures. While one disk is off line for any reason, your disk array is not fully redundant. Therefore, old good tape backups are always recommended.

Please add your thoughts and experience in the comments below.

Further readings:

Linux Creating a Partition Size Larger Than 2TB

Frankly speaking, you cannot create a Linux partition larger than 2 TB using the fdisk command. The fdisk won't create partitions larger than 2 TB. This is fine for desktop and laptop users, but on server you need a large partition. For example, you cannot create 3TB or 4TB partition size (RAID based) using the fdisk command. It will not allow you to create a partition that is greater than 2TB. In this tutorial, you will learn more about creating Linux filesystems greater than 2 Terabytes to support enterprise grade operation under any Linux distribution.
[click to continue…]