<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:45 AM, David Brodbeck <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gull@gull.us">gull@gull.us</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">James Oltman wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Just be sure to get good quality hardware/cables. I'm currently suffering through an array loss due to either faulty PCI cards, cables, or possibly a bad drive/s. I had a drive go out in my RAID 5 and sent it to Seagate for an RMA. They took their sweet time getting one back to me. The very same day the replacement arrived, the array took another dump. I wasn't able to get it to resync.<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
This is the inherent danger with RAID 5. When I plan a RAID 5 array I try to figure in the cost of keeping one spare drive on hand, so the array doesn't have to be vulnerable while I wait for an RMA. For arrays where I might not want to swap drives right away (e.g., at work, where it might mean coming in on a weekend), I use RAID 6 or RAID 5 with a hot spare.<div>
<div></div><div class="h5"></div></div></blockquote><div><br>You're still vulnerable during the rebuild. Is there any advantage to RAID5+spare (hot or not) vs RAID6?<br><br>Cheers,<br>Steve <br></div></div>