<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1" ?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>All about RAID 10  glued for you by GlueText.com on October 06, 2009 at 08:16 EST</title>
<description>All about RAID 10,  glued for you by GlueText.com on October 06, 2009 at 08:16 EST </description>
<link>http://www-r.gluetext.com/content/r/RAID_10/RAID_10.html</link>
<item>
<title>Glued for you by GlueText.com</title>
<description>Search for 
RAID 10  or anything else at GlueText.com</description>
<link>http://www.gluetext.com/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.gluetext.com/</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:16 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>This page in HTML about 
RAID 10  glued for you by GlueText.com</title>
<description>Read these articles about RAID 10  and more... All glued for you by GlueText.com</description>
<link>http://www-r.gluetext.com/content/r/RAID_10/RAID_10.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www-r.gluetext.com/content/r/RAID_10/RAID_10.html</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 08:16 EST</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   Raid 10    chunksize</title>
<description><![CDATA[  Raid 10   chunksize I'm trying to pin down some performance issues with a machine where I work, we are seeing (read only) query response times blow out by an order of magnitude or more at busy times. Initially we blamed autovacuum, but after a tweak of the cost_delay it is *not* the problem. Then I looked at checkpoints... and altho there was some correlation with them and the query response - I'm thinking that the raid chunksize may well be the issue. . Fortunately there is an identical DR box, so I could do a little testing. Details follow: . Sun 4140 2x quad-core opteron 2356 16G RAM, 6x 15K 140G SAS Debian Lenny Pg 8.3.6 The disk is laid out using software (md) raid: 4 drives   raid 10   *4K* chunksize with database files (e]]></description>
<link>http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2009-03/msg00353.php</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-performance/2009-03/msg00353.php</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Mar 2009 22:25:46 -0300 (ADT)</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID-10 - Simple Thoughts: Java   Web Technology Blog</title>
<description><![CDATA[Latest Tweets RAID-10 Jewish Community Action invites you to meet filmmakers of abUSed-The Postville Raid, 10/6, 7pm @ SP JCC http://www.jewishcommunityaction.org On holiday... so, it's time for some tech! 4 x 1Tb hard drives should arrive today. Going to set them up in RAID-10. Mmmm, fault-tolerance! Hm, OK, if the   RAID 10   rebuild time is really aprox. 1-5 hours, I think I'm going with this one. Anybody else information on this? How long does it take to rebuild a 1TB big   RAID 10   after swapping 1/4 drives? Anyone some experience with this? 10 people logged on, 10 people in the raid, 10 people rolling on Ony backpack. How is Windows server 2008 with software raid (specifically   raid 10  )? Anyone? Reading a]]></description>
<link>http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/t/raid-10/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.taragana.com/index.php/t/raid-10/</guid>
<pubDate>Sat, 03 Oct 2009 12:35:02 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID 1+0 is the Cadillac of RAID | Storage Bits 
		| ZDNet.com</title>
<description><![CDATA[What is RAID 1+0? Sometimes shortened to   RAID 10  , RAID 1+0 is a particular combination of two different RAID levels: mirroring (RAID 1) and striping (RAID 0). The appeal of RAID 1+0 is simple: mirroring gives you the highest level of availability RAID offers, with the fastest rebuild times when a disk fails; while striping - using the proper chunk size - is the basis for high-performance I/O. . Put the two together and you have the best of both worlds. Until George showed up with his facts. . What about the poor performance George found? We re coming to that, but first a word from our sponsor. . There is an important difference between RAID 1+0 and RAID 0+1 that not everyone appreciates. In RAI]]></description>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=131</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=131</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:58 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>SmallNetBuilder - Small Network Help - Iomega adds Marvell-powered RAID 5/10 NAS</title>
<description><![CDATA[The StorCenter ix4-200d comes in 2, 4 and 8 TB configurations and supports a single JBOD, RAID 5 or   RAID 10   volume. It runs EMC's Linux-based Lifeline OS on a 1.2 GHz Marvell 6281 and 512 MB of RAM. . Other hardware features include dual Gigabit Ethernet ports can be configured in separate, failover and aggregation modes and three USB 2.0 ports for printer serving, Bluetooth dongle and UPS shutdown synchronization. . Storage can be configured to simultaneously support SMB/CIFS, NFS and AFP file sharing, Apple Time Machine storage and iSCSI targets. Scheduled or immediate backups can be done to USB-attached drives and over the network to rsync targets. EMC]]></description>
<link>http://c.moreover.com/click/here.pl?z2171059282 =950244866</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://c.moreover.com/click/here.pl?z2171059282 =950244866</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:58 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>S5000VSA    Raid 10    config lost... ...</title>
<description><![CDATA[1 posts since Jul 3, 2009 Jul 3, 2009 6:16 AM S5000VSA   Raid 10   config lost... . I have a problem with S5000VSA board, my system was ok and configured with four disks in   raid 10   with Intel Embedded Server raid. . After a shut down of the system, i get an error at post and i see that the raid console prompt only hard drives in sata port 2 and 3, nothing in sata port 0 and 1. I have simply disconnected and reconnected the two hard drives in sata port 0 - 1 and the raid console now show all of four hard disks. . The problem is that all of these hard disks results as "non raid member" and the only option that i can d]]></description>
<link>http://communities.intel.com/thread/4742</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communities.intel.com/thread/4742</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:16:50 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>VMware Communities: Adaptec 5405    RAID 10    With SATA Hard Drives</title>
<description><![CDATA[Adaptec 5405   RAID 10   With SATA Hard Drives Aug 7, 2009 5:51 AM Before I buy an Adaptec 5405 RAID controller I want to double check that it is possible to use the raid array it will create to store my datastore. . . . I'm planning on using 4 SATA 1TB drives in   RAID 10  , will this work with vmware esxi 4.0? . . . Will I be able to boot from this raid array? Its running ESXI 4.0 at the moment but from a single hard drive as none of the on-board controllers are supported by ESXI. I just don't want to buy the adaptec controller and find I need to buy SAS drives for ESXI to use in a RAID array. Adaptec 5405 is running fine with ESXi 4.0 in a RAID10 setup including]]></description>
<link>http://communities.vmware.com/message/1332656</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://communities.vmware.com/message/1332656</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:59 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>What is RAID?</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   or 1+0 .   RAID 10   is effectively a similar version to RAID 0+1. Rather than striping data between the disk sets and then mirroring them, the first two drives in the set are a mirrored together. The second two drives form another set of disks that is are mirror of one another but store striped data with the first pair. This is a form of nested RAID setup. Drives 1 and 2 are a RAID 1 mirror and drives 3 and 4 are also a mirror. These two sets are then setup as stripped array. . Below is an example of how data is written in a   RAID 10   implementation. Each r]]></description>
<link>http://compreviews.about.com/od/storage/l/aaRAIDPage1.htm</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://compreviews.about.com/od/storage/l/aaRAIDPage1.htm</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:59 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Nested RAID levels - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>
<description><![CDATA[A RAID 0+1 (also called RAID 01, not to be confused with   RAID 10  ), is a RAID level used for both replicating and sharing data among disks.The minimum amount of disks required to implement this level of RAID is 4. The difference between RAID 0+1 and RAID 1+0 is the location of each RAID system â€” RAID 0+1 is a mirror of stripes. The size of a RAID 0+1 array can be calculated as follows where is the capacity of the smallest drive in the array: . Consider an example of RAID 0+1: six 120 GB drives need to be set up on a RAID 0+1. Below is an example where two 360 GB level 0 arrays are mirrored, creating 360 GB of total storage space: Note: A1, A2, et cetera each represent one data block; each column represents one disk. . The maxim]]></description>
<link>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nested_RAID_levels</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nested_RAID_levels</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:55:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>
<description><![CDATA[For example,   RAID 10   (or RAID 1+0) consists of several level 1 arrays of physical drives, each of which is one of the "drives" of a level 0 array striped over the level 1 arrays. It is not called RAID 01, to avoid confusion with RAID 1, or indeed, RAID 01. When the top array is a RAID 0 (such as in   RAID 10   and RAID 50) most vendors omit the "+", though RAID 5+0 is clearer. RAID 0+1: striped sets in a mirrored set (minimum four disks; even number of disks) provides fault tolerance and improved performance but increases complexity. The key difference from RAID 1+0 is that RAID 0+1 creates a second striped set to mirror a primary striped set. The array continues to operate with one or more drives failed in the same mirr]]></description>
<link>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:13:31 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Hardware RAID 0 with software RAID 1... a working    RAID 10   ? - Topic Powered by Eve Community</title>
<description><![CDATA[I'm looking to start testing a Zimbra mail installation and normally for something like this I would go for   RAID 10   since the data is mirrored but also striped for quick access. Perfect for a big mail DB!. . We've got a 3Ware 9690SA-8i RAID card and 8 hot-swap bays (two 4 bay 5.25" backplane units). At the moment 5 of those bays are being used by 1TB drives in a RAID 6 array for our shared files/intranet system.. A further single bay is a hot-spare.. . So that leaves 2 drive bays.. If I install 2x1TB drives and configure them in a hardware RAID 0, but then partition that stripe into 2 volumes and do software RAID 1... would that work?. The difficult bit is to somehow make sure that 2 partitions are split equally, one o]]></description>
<link>http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/24609792/m/249002751041</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://episteme.arstechnica.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/24609792/m/249002751041</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:59 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>QNAP NAS Community Forum   View topic -    RAID 10    for 809u, limitation of system board?</title>
<description><![CDATA[Change font size --&gt;   RAID 10   for 809u, limitation of system board? . by patriots on Tue Sep 01, 2009 4:45 am patriots Cadet Posts: 29 Joined: Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:53 pm Country: NAS Model: TS-639U Re:   RAID 10   for 809u, limitation of system board? . by QNAPFrances on Tue Sep 01, 2009 10:31 am It is not enabled in the firmware.We recommend you use RAID5/6 instead of   RAID 10   due to the capacity and stability issue.BR,Frances QNAPFrances Silver Warrior Posts: 464 Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2009 4:48 pm Location: Taipei Country:]]></description>
<link>http://forum.qnap.com/viewtopic.php?f=25 =18507</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forum.qnap.com/viewtopic.php?f=25 =18507</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:13:45 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    help. - The FreeBSD Forums</title>
<description><![CDATA[Hi guys, I have 4 really fast big drives that I'd like to use   RAID 10   with, but....I ONLY have these 4 drives. Is it possible to use   RAID 10   for everything (/ /tmp /var /usr , etc.) I was thinking of doing it this way. Install FreeBSD (7.2) onto one of the disks. Creating mirror0 and mirror1 out of two pairs. Then creating stripe out of mirror0 and mirror1. Well, I was able to create the mirrors. mirror0 has the OS on it now. mirror1 has nothing. What do I do from here? I'm assuming that I can't stripe two mirrors when one of the mirrors has the entire OS on it. Thanks for your help.]]></description>
<link>http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=5866</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=5866</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    for new PC build? : Storage</title>
<description><![CDATA[--&gt;   RAID 10   for new PC build? . by Skippman Thu Mar 26, 2009 11:49 am Ok, so I'm in the design phases of WarMachine 2.0 and I'm trying to understand a few things early so I can know what purchases to make over the year.I plan to use the new Corsair case as my chasis. It will come with a hot swap SATA hard drive cage on the front of the case. That got me to thinking, my RAID 0 array is fundementially unstable. But it IS fast. So, I started reading and found out about   RAID 10  . That's a RAID 0 set nested in a RAID 1 mirrored set. Theoretically this would give me the fas]]></description>
<link>http://forums.legitreviews.com/about20685.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.legitreviews.com/about20685.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:01 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Storage General Discussion - Re:    Raid 10    on StorageTek 6140</title>
<description><![CDATA[participate participate wikis blogs planets forums mediacast Hello Is there any posibility to make   RAID 10   Volume on StorageTek 6140 ? When i'm trying to make new profile in CAM i can only select raid levels 0,1,3,5,6. On the list I've got 16 FC disks. I can't find any documentation from Sun on that topic. My software: - firmware version 07.50.13.10. - Sun CAM version 6.4 TIA Edited by: wdmadm on Aug 26, 2009 12:13 AM About Sun forums . Sun Forums is a large collection of user generated discussions. It is here to help you ask questions, find answers, and participate in discussions.]]></description>
<link>http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5404486</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums.sun.com/thread.jspa?threadID=5404486</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>IT Resource Center forums - SCSI 14 disk    raid 10    array</title>
<description><![CDATA[How can we determine which slots the drives belong in? with a smart array, you can swap places, and it will still work!!When you got a large array with 14 disks in a   RAID 10  , it will groupe the disks nicely, Disk 1 will be mirrord to disk 8. Disk 2 will be mirrored to disk 9 etc.If you don't care, then you can put all disk in, in any order, and power the server. You will get a warning, that places has been swapped, and you must press F1.I don't know if you can use the ADU afterwards to sort the original posistions.And I also don't know, if you can put 1 drive in, and use adu to retrieve the location of the missing drives.if you got an old adu, then you can find the location using the s/n.So if you don't care to keep the order, just put them in and power on the server.cheers/jag]]></description>
<link>http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=1374780</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://forums11.itrc.hp.com/service/forums/questionanswer.do?threadId=1374780</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:02 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Kendal Van Dyke: Disk Performance Hands On, Part 2:    RAID 10    Performance</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   is the most commonly recommended type of configuration to house OLTP data files for SQL Server because of the balance of redundancy and speed that it offers. However, poorly chosen configuration options can result in lackluster performance. Today I m going to look at how stripe size, partition offset, and allocation unit size can affect the performance of a hardware based   RAID 10   drive. For reference I m using the results from my Test Harness #1, a Dell PowerEdge 2950 (view the test harness specifics here). I m assuming you re familiar with the various RAID levels; if not, take a second to read the Wikipedia entry on it. . Stripe Size Allocation Unit Size When configuring a   RAID 10   drive the fi]]></description>
<link>http://kendalvandyke.blogspot.com/2009/02/disk-performance-hands-on-part-2-raid.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://kendalvandyke.blogspot.com/2009/02/disk-performance-hands-on-part-2-raid.html</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 06:44:57 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Install    RAID 10    on Ubuntu</title>
<description><![CDATA[  Raid 10   is the fastest RAID level that also has good redundancy too. So I was disappointed that Ubuntu did not have it as a option for my new file server. I did not want shell out lots of money for a RAID controller, especially since benchmarks show little performance benefit using a Hardware controller configured for   RAID 10   in a file server. read more score:9531 -falko, August 20, 2008 More Sysadmin articles.... Run VirtualBox 3 headless on Fedora 11 Tutorial: Install Adobe AIR 1.1 on Ubuntu 8.04 Umit, the graphical network scanner Smbind: Web manageme]]></description>
<link>http://librenix.com/?inode=12460</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://librenix.com/?inode=12460</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:02 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>[CentOS] RAID 5 vs.    RAID 10   </title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   Bryan J. Smith b.j.smith at ieee.org . Mon Jul 25 11:49:10 UTC 2005 . . On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 17:57 +0800, Andrew Vong wrote: Hi, I am looking into purchasing a new server. This server will be mission-critical. What application(s)? That's the biggie. I have read and somewhat understood the theories behind RAIDs 0, 1, 5, 10 JBOD. However, I would like to get some feedback from those who have experience in implementing and recovering from a HDD failure using RAID. On a 3Ware card (no spare): - Pull out bad drive - Put in new dr]]></description>
<link>http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2005-July/007155.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/2005-July/007155.html</guid>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 Aug 2008 11:33:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Re: Debian on hardware    RAID 10   </title>
<description><![CDATA[--&gt; [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] Re: Debian on hardware   RAID 10   . Eldar Gafiyatov wrote: Yes, the raid controller is built-in in ASUS P5E. I set the bios to use intel ich8 . That's fake RAID. You may be better off using Linux software RAID instead. I've never used fake RAID because it's a junk solution, if you can call it a solution. Get a real hardware SATA RAID controller like a 3ware, Mylex (LSI Logic), or Adaptec. You'll be much happier in the long run. . BTW, is Asus making Itanium boards now? This list is for IA64 not x86-64. Reply to:]]></description>
<link>http://lists.debian.org/debian-ia64/2008/08/msg00030.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lists.debian.org/debian-ia64/2008/08/msg00030.html</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2008 14:20:27 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Linux-Kernel Archive: Re:    Raid 10    question/problem [ot]</title>
<description><![CDATA[--&gt; Re:   Raid 10   question/problem [ot] From: Bill Davidsen Date: Sun Jan 28 2007 - 12:40:08 EST . Next message: Jiri Slaby: "Re: elevator oops [Was: 2.6.20-rc6-mm1]" Previous message: Martin J. Bligh: "Re: lockmeter" In reply to: Jan Engelhardt: "Re:   Raid 10   question/problem [ot]" Next in thread: Michael Tokarev: "Re:   Raid 10   question/problem [ot]" Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] Marc Perkel wrote: I'm a little stumped trying to set up   raid 10  . I set it up and it worked but after a reboot it forgets my raid setup. Created 2 raid 1 arrays in md0 and md1 and that works an]]></description>
<link>http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0701.3/1317.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0701.3/1317.html</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 28 Jan 2007 21:50:03 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>'Re: [webmin-l]    RAID 10   ' - MARC</title>
<description><![CDATA[[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [ next in thread ] List: webmin-l Subject: Re: [webmin-l]   RAID 10   From: "Miguel Medalha" miguelmedalha () sapo ! pt Date: 2007-06-11 18:35:35 Message-ID: 002201c7ac57$4ce7f270$0901a8c0 () medalha [Download message RAW] Ok, I didn't realize that mdadm actually supported   RAID 10   directly like that .. often I have seen it done with RAID 0 on top of RAID 1, configured separately (or is it the other way around?). Actually you can create a RAID 0+1 array, a RAID 1+0 array or a   RAID 10   array: RAID 0+1 - Raid 1 array over 2 or more Raid 0 arrays - kernel modules raid0+raid1 RAID 1+0 - Raid 0 array over 2 or more Raid 1 arrays (better security) - kernel modules raid1+raid0   RAID 10   - Direct   RAID 10   array (supports an uneven number of disks) - kernel module raid10 The first two are nested arrays, with two layers of RAID devices; the last one]]></description>
<link>http://marc.info/?l=webmin-l =118158700319984 =2</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://marc.info/?l=webmin-l =118158700319984 =2</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:03 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Forum OpenACS Q : Re: OT: Dell PowerEdge    RAID 10    Configuration</title>
<description><![CDATA[Forum OpenACS Q : Re: OT: Dell PowerEdge   RAID 10   Configuration . James, why limit yourself to only 4+1 disks? Do you have severe space constraints for the server? I.e., it it being co-located somewhere and has to fit in 1 or 2 U? . Because if not, the traditional "small number of very fast SCSI disks" might still be the way to go, but a larger number of cheaper disks might actually work much better. Unfortunately, I have never seen a good study addressing that question. . You might try asking the guys at Net Express. I know people who've bought servers from them, and have heard that they']]></description>
<link>http://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message_id=178567</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://openacs.org/forums/message-view?message_id=178567</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>OpenSolaris Forums : opensolaris    raid 10    ...</title>
<description><![CDATA[I have raid 2 perc 5i raid controllers in a server, what I would like to do is do a   raid 10   setup, however the catch is I would like the controller to handle the striping and opensolaris to handle the mirroring, this way I can use the cache on the card and still get the benefits of zfs. I will be doing 4 different   raid 10   pools. The only way I have found is making single disk raid 0 arrays on the card and letting solaris do what is needed. However I believe this to be raid 0+1 and not   raid 10  . Is this correct? Any posts or just simple pointers in the right direction would be great. Thanks!Greg Hi Greg,I'm not so great with the hardware lingo, but when I think about whatyou want in terms of mirroring and striping, your understanding iscorrect.ZFS auto]]></description>
<link>http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=110746 =15</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=110746 =15</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    overview</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   overview .   RAID 10   provides high availability by combining features of RAID 0 and RAID 1. The DS6000â„¢ series supports   RAID 10   arrays. . RAID 0 increases performance by striping volume data across multiple disk drives. RAID 1 provides disk mirroring which duplicates data between two disk drives. By combining the features of RAID 0 and RAID 1,   RAID 10   provides a second optimization for fault tolerance. .   RAID 10   implementation provides data mirroring from one DDM to another DDM.   RAID 10   stripes data across half of the disk drives in the   RAID 10   confi]]></description>
<link>http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/dsichelp/ds6000ic/topic/com.ibm.storage.smric.help.doc/f2d_raid-10implementation_1tkkta.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/dsichelp/ds6000ic/topic/com.ibm.storage.smric.help.doc/f2d_raid-10implementation_1tkkta.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:03 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    overview</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   overview .   RAID 10   provides high availability by combining features of RAID 0 and RAID 1. The DS8000 series supports   RAID 10   arrays. . RAID 0 increases performance by striping volume data across multiple disk drives. RAID 1 provides disk mirroring, which duplicates data between two disk drives. By combining the features of RAID 0 and RAID 1,   RAID 10   provides a second optimization for fault tolerance. .   RAID 10   implementation provides data mirroring from one DDM to another DDM.   RAID 10   stripes data across half of the disk drives in the   RAID 10   configu]]></description>
<link>http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/dsichelp/ds8000ic/topic/com.ibm.storage.ssic.help.doc/f2d_raid-10implementation_1tkkta.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/dsichelp/ds8000ic/topic/com.ibm.storage.ssic.help.doc/f2d_raid-10implementation_1tkkta.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>How many disk drives do you need for    RAID 10   ?</title>
<description><![CDATA[The minimum number of drives required for   RAID 10   is four.   RAID 10   is a combination of RAID 1 and RAID 0, the first step of which is to create a number of RAID 1 volumes by mirroring two drives together (RAID 1). The second step involves creating a stripe set with these mirrored pairs (RAID 0). In its original form this was called RAID 1+0, but has been abbreviated to   RAID 10  . If you had any less than four drives you would only be able to make a single RAID 1 mirror set..   RAID 10   should not be confused with RAID 0+1, which involves creating two RAID 0 stripe sets and then mirroring them. They have ver]]></description>
<link>http://searchstorage.techtarget.co.uk/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid181_gci1362820,00.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchstorage.techtarget.co.uk/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid181_gci1362820,00.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    vs. RAID 1: Mirrored drives matter</title>
<description><![CDATA[While   RAID 10   and RAID 1 are both mirroring technologies that utilise half of the available drives for data, there's one crucial difference: the number of drives that can be used in a RAID group. RAID 1 involves only two drives that are mirrored to provide resilience in the event of a single disk failure.   RAID 10   involves at least four drives, and creates a RAID 0 stripe set involving two or more RAID 1 mirrors. . Depending on the location of the drives, a   RAID 10   configuration can recover from multiple drive failures while using the same percentage of data drives as RAID 1. It can also provide increased performance due to the increased number of spindles in the RAID group.]]></description>
<link>http://searchstorage.techtarget.co.uk/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid181_gci1364126,00.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchstorage.techtarget.co.uk/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid181_gci1364126,00.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID 6 vs.    RAID 10    :: SearchStorage.com.au</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   . What you will learn: Rick Cook outlines the most efficient uses of RAID 6 and   RAID 10  . . Many storage administrators today are grappling with the question of when to use   RAID 10   protection and when to use RAID 6 protection.   RAID 10   mirrors the data and then stripes the result across the disks. RAID 6 stripes the data and calculates parity twice, with the results stored in different blocks on the disks. Here s a look at the advantages of these two RAID levels. . RAID 6 uses less storage, if you have enough disks in the array. . A   RAID 10  ]]></description>
<link>http://searchstorage.techtarget.com.au/tips/22178-RAID-6-vs-RAID-1-</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchstorage.techtarget.com.au/tips/22178-RAID-6-vs-RAID-1-</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:03 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>How many disk drives do you need for    RAID 10   ?</title>
<description><![CDATA[What is the minimum number of disk drives you can have in a   RAID 10   array? I have read you must have at least four, but our server admin said it is HP's default, and he can do it on just two drives. This is on a Window Server 2003 with a total of four 72 gigabyte (GB) drives in the server and 11 36 GB drives external. By joining SearchStorage.com you agree to receive email updates from the TechTarget network of sites, including updates on new content, magazine or event notifications, new site launches and market research surveys. Please verify all information and selections above. You may unsubscribe at any time from one or more of the services you have selected by editing your]]></description>
<link>http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid5_gci1156053,00.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/expert/KnowledgebaseAnswer/0,289625,sid5_gci1156053,00.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Exchange Server 2007 - Partioning    RAID 10    - LUNS  - Confusion - mine</title>
<description><![CDATA[The   RAID 10   array would present the entire space from an array. Â  If we set up six drives in   RAID 10   (3 for the data, 3 for the mirroring) we would need to use Windows Server 2008 (which we own for this machine) to partition the space to present it for the storage groups for Exchange. EHLO and elsewhere seems to advise letting the hardware (or NAS; which we do not own) partition the space. Is it silly to consider using Server 2008 to partition a   RAID 10   array or should I stick with RAID 5 and let the RAID card set up virtual disks? own RAID 1 array? If we run eseutil or otherwise hammer a storage group i]]></description>
<link>http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/exchangesvrdeploy/thread/7005ecd9-446f-41d9-a9a8-c336ca2921c4</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/exchangesvrdeploy/thread/7005ecd9-446f-41d9-a9a8-c336ca2921c4</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>What The Heck is    RAID 10   ? | spiralbound.net</title>
<description><![CDATA[Tags concatenate, data, disk, disks, mirror, mirroring, raid, raid 0, raid 1,   raid 10  , storage, stripe, striped, striping, systems administration, technology . Earlier this month, a company came along and asked for a   RAID 10   array. Understanding that   RAID 10   is a cooler sounding way of saying RAID 1+0, I understood it as a mirror set that is striped across another mirror set. Simple enough Just concatenate a couple of mirrors, and you ve got   RAID 10  . . Indeed,   RAID 10   is simply one or more RAID 1 arrays (mirrored sets) striped together (RAID 0). . RAID 1 creates an exact copy (or mirror) of all of data on two or more disks, while RAID 0 splits data evenly across two or more disks with no parity inf]]></description>
<link>http://spiralbound.net/2005/09/28/what-the-heck-is-raid-10</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://spiralbound.net/2005/09/28/what-the-heck-is-raid-10</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:15:25 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Storage: RAID-DP vs    RAID 10    protection</title>
<description><![CDATA[Most vendors to date, use a RAID 1 or   RAID 10   protection schemes to address the shortcomings of PATA/SATA drives. What we do know about these drives is that they have low MTBFs and the Bit Error Rate is 10^14. That's approximately 1 bit error per 11.3TB. Compare this to FC drives at 10^15 with 1 bit error per 113TB!!! . Drive reliability is a function of two elements: MTBF (Mean Time Between Failures) and BER (Bit Error Rate). Historically ATA drives have demonstrated lower reliability than SCSI or FC drives and this has nothing to do with the interface type but rather it's directly related to the components used (media, actuator, motor etc) in the drive.]]></description>
<link>http://storagefoo.blogspot.com/2006/05/raid-dp-vs-raid-10-protection.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://storagefoo.blogspot.com/2006/05/raid-dp-vs-raid-10-protection.html</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 05:16:55 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>raid 5/4 disks vs    raid 10    with 4 disks | 1 of 8</title>
<description><![CDATA[in Forums all of TechRepublic Question - Post 1 of 8 raid 5/4 disks vs   raid 10   with 4 disks We are rebuilding a database server and need to increase performance. we were told to go to   raid 10   take off the os/transaction logs to a mirrored drives and to keep the raid to 4 drives. Current setup is raid 5/4 disks, non mirrored for os. Question is,  Raid 10   with 4 drives is going to have a major increase in performance over a raid 5? or should we get more drives for the   raid 10  . Posted: MikePell Job Role: Networking / LAN Administration Location: E SANDWICH, Massachusetts Member since: 03/04/2001 View Profile Send Message]]></description>
<link>http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11184-0.html?forumID=55 =183003</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11184-0.html?forumID=55 =183003</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:06 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   Raid 10    | 1 of 4</title>
<description><![CDATA[in Forums all of TechRepublic Question - Post 1 of 4   Raid 10   Do   Raid 10   have the minimum of 6 harddrives? Or how many harddrive is the minimum required? And also is the "HP iPax 4700 PDA" a good PDA? Posted: bjlewis_2004@... Job Role: Technical/PC Support Location: Camden, Arkansas Member since: 08/17/2005 View Profile Send Message Sponsored White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads Essential Topics White Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads Browse by tag networking Popular tags: windows, software, hardware, security, it management e-mail Popular tags: windows, software, networking, security, hardware]]></description>
<link>http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11186-0.html?forumID=34 =183553</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://techrepublic.com.com/5208-11186-0.html?forumID=34 =183553</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:06 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>[ubuntu]    RAID 10    implementation [Archive]  - Ubuntu Forums</title>
<description><![CDATA[Here is a good overview of raid arrays.http://www.acnc.com/04_01_10.html   Raid 10   has the same fault tolerance as raid 1, which is a mirror. The array will no longer be viable until rebuilt but the data is still there and can be booted as long as grub is installed on that drive. your partitioning looks fine. and   RAID 10   should boot, i tested this on Debian Etch extensively detaching all the disks, not all at the the same time offcourse ;) http://www.songshu.org/index.php/setup-r...  this is what i did and this works. i've also been hearing stories that Hardy RAID 1 has a bug, sounds like exactly the issue, you might just want to team up on launchpad for this]]></description>
<link>http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-774190.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ubuntuforums.org/archive/index.php/t-774190.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:06 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>AC NC | RAID.edu - RAID Levels - RAID Level 10 -    RAID 10   </title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   is implemented as a striped array whose segments are RAID 1 arrays .   RAID 10   has the same fault tolerance as RAID level 1 .   RAID 10   has the same overhead for fault-tolerance as mirroring alone . High I/O rates are achieved by striping RAID 1 segments . Under certain circumstances,   RAID 10   array can sustain multiple simultaneous drive failures . Excellent solution for sites that would have otherwise gone with RAID 1 but need some additional performance boost Very expensive / High overhead . All drives must move in parallel to proper track lowering sustained performance . Ver]]></description>
<link>http://www.acnc.com/04_01_10.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acnc.com/04_01_10.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:10:14 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>What's    RAID 10    And Why Should I Use It?</title>
<description><![CDATA[What's   RAID 10   And Why Should I Use It? . RAID is, of course, a Redundant Array of Independent (or Inexpensive) Disks. It is a method of storing information on multiple hard disks for greater protection and in some cases performance. Under the RAID umbrella are a number of different storage methods, called levels and numbered from 0 to 9, some of which are more useful than others. . Each level is a distinct method of organizing storage, but some of them can be combined which produces a two-digit RAID level, such as   RAID 10  , sometimes identified (and more appropriately so) as RAID 1+0.]]></description>
<link>http://www.acronis.com/resource/tips-tricks/2005/whats-raid-10.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.acronis.com/resource/tips-tricks/2005/whats-raid-10.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:07 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID 5 Vs.    RAID 10   </title>
<description><![CDATA[Data Storage Backup Backup Software Blu-ray Discs Data Management Data Mining Data Recovery Data Recovery Software Hard Drive Data Recovery Hard Drives Network Attached Storage Online Backup Portable Storage Recover Deleted Files USB Flash Drive Computers &amp; InternetComputer HistoryComputer IndustryComputer UsesComputers in Business &amp; Corporate ComputingHardware &amp; AccessoriesMultimedia &amp; Digital ImagingNewsOrganizations &amp; AssociationsPersonal ComputersProgramming &amp; LanguagesSoftware &amp; UtilitiesVideo &amp; Computer GamesWorld Wide WebComputers &amp; Internet Articles There is often a comparison between RAID 5 and   RAID 10   and a debate on the difference between RAID 5 and   RAID 10  . This article has thus been written, to present the RAID 5 vs   RAID 10   comparison. But before we start with the RAID 5 vs   RAID 10   comparison, we need to know what is RAID? What is RAID? RAID is the acronym for Redundant Array of Independent Disks and was previously known as Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks. The words were changed as the word inexpensiv]]></description>
<link>http://www.buzzle.com/articles/raid5-vs-raid10.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.buzzle.com/articles/raid5-vs-raid10.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    and 01 question</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   and 01 question . Comment: . Regarding   RAID 10   and 01 implementations with 6 drives, how is the data mirrored and striped across the 6 drives? How many drives can you loose and still be able to function? Which drives can you loose, for example, are three of the drives mirrored while the other three of provided stripping? I guess I am not sure how the fault tolerance works within the   RAID 10   and 01 configurations. . . . Response Number 1 . . Response Number 2 Reply: . . Response Number 3 Reply: . Whew.... Rai]]></description>
<link>http://www.computing.net/answers/hardware/raid-10-and-01-question/38594.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.computing.net/answers/hardware/raid-10-and-01-question/38594.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:18:13 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID 5 vs    RAID 10   : Recommended RAID For Sa...</title>
<description><![CDATA[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. RAID 5 vs   RAID 10   . From Art S. Kagel research findings: . If a drive costs $1000US (and most are far less expensive than that)]]></description>
<link>http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/raid5-vs-raid-10-safety-performance.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/raid5-vs-raid-10-safety-performance.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:08 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   Raid 10    Data Recovery |    Raid 10    Recovery Service by Data Recovery Labs</title>
<description><![CDATA[--&gt; Home Our Services Raid Data Recovery About Data Recovery Labs Our Clients Emergency Contact Request a Data Recovery Quote   Raid 10   Data Recovery by Data Recovery Labs. . Data Recovery Labs is the leader in the IT industry's Raid Data Recovery market. Providing in house data recovery services for all Redundant Array of Independent Drive (RAID) configurations, NAS, SAN and multi disk server configurations for all operating systems and storage media.. .   Raid 10   is a nested RAID level and can be described as striped mirroring. Like RAID 0+1,   RAID 10   provides the benefits of both reliance and performance. Multiple RAID 1 arrays are grouped into a single RAID 0 array and the striping of blocks is mirrored via th]]></description>
<link>http://www.datarecoverylabs.com/raid-10-data-recovery-raid-recovery.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datarecoverylabs.com/raid-10-data-recovery-raid-recovery.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:08 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>How to Install Ubuntu 8.01 Intrepid on    RAID 10    | eHow.com</title>
<description><![CDATA[How to Install Ubuntu 8.01 Intrepid on   RAID 10   .   Raid 10   not only is the fastest RAID level but also has good redundancy too. (RAID = Redundant Array of Independent Disks). However, the Ubuntu Live CD installer doesâ€™nt support the software RAID. This is the result of a minor bug in Ubuntu, which makes the RAID10 disk to be invisible during the installation. This tutorial will show you how to troubleshoot this bug, and install it on   RAID 10  : . Power on your computer, and then create a RAID set. Hereâ€™s how:*Hit [Ctrl + I] on your keyboard. This takes you to the Intel Matrix S]]></description>
<link>http://www.ehow.com/how_4858887_install-ubuntu-intrepid-raid.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ehow.com/how_4858887_install-ubuntu-intrepid-raid.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Manage a Linux    RAID 10    Storage Server - www.enterprisenetworkingplanet.com</title>
<description><![CDATA[Today we'll learn how to monitor, maintain, and make changes in our   RAID 10   array. We'll make it bigger, smaller, safely test failure recovery, and set up monitoring and failure notifications. . In part 2 of this series we learned how to create a   RAID 10   array during a clean, new Kubuntu installation. The same method works with all the *buntus, Debian and CentOS 5.1. However, there is an even easier way the Fedora 8 Anaconda installer supports   RAID 10  , and it recognizes existing RAID and LVM volumes without having to resort to the hacks we used last week. In fact the Fedora 8 graphical installer is sleek and fast; in my op]]></description>
<link>http://www.enterprisenetworkingplanet.com/nethub/article.php/3731646</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.enterprisenetworkingplanet.com/nethub/article.php/3731646</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    Data Recovery and Repair from the Hard Drive Recovery Group</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   Data Recovery by HDRG .   RAID 10   is a popular enterprise RAID system for many reasons, but mainly because its robust structure actually consists of a Stripe of RAID 1 mirrors, with a RAID 0 setup created over top. Need immediate help? Click here to request a quote on our 24 hour turnaround RAID data recovery service. This enables not only superior replication and shared data, but also simpler seek and read operations, as well as simple rebuilding in case of single HDD failure; a recipe for easy   RAID 10   data recovery. This configuration combines the high speed of]]></description>
<link>http://www.harddriverecovery.org/raidcenter/raid_10_data_recovery.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.harddriverecovery.org/raidcenter/raid_10_data_recovery.html</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 22:45:31 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Install Ubuntu With Software    RAID 10    | HowtoForge - Linux Howtos and Tutorials</title>
<description><![CDATA[HowtoForge Survey Navigation User login HowtoForge Forums News Recent comments Newsletter Install Ubuntu With Software   RAID 10   Install Ubuntu With Software   RAID 10   . The Ubuntu Live CD installer doesn't support software RAID, and the server and alternate CDs only allow you to do RAID levels 0, 1, and 5.   Raid 10   is the fastest RAID level that also has good redundancy too. So I was disappointed that Ubuntu didn't have it as a option for my new file server. I didn't want shell out lots of money for a RAID controller, especially since benchmarks show little performance benefit using a Hardware controller configured for   RAID 10   in a file server. . 1 Before you start . I'll asume you have already known abo]]></description>
<link>http://www.howtoforge.com/install-ubuntu-with-software-raid-10</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.howtoforge.com/install-ubuntu-with-software-raid-10</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Intel® Matrix Storage Manager - What is    RAID 10   ?</title>
<description><![CDATA[A   RAID 10   array uses four hard drives to create a combination of RAID levels 0 and 1 by forming a RAID 0 array from two RAID 1 arrays.Since all of the data on the RAID 0 array is duplicated, the capacity of a   RAID 10   array is the size of the RAID 0 array. For example, four 400 GB hard drives in a   RAID 10   array will appear as a single 800 GB hard drive to the operating system. . The primary benefit of   RAID 10   is that it combines the benefits of RAID 0 performance and RAID 1 fault-tolerance. It provides good data reliability in the case of a single drive failure. When one hard drive fails, all data is immediately available from the other half of the mirror without any impact to the data integrity. In the case of a disk failure, the computer system will remain fully operational to ensure maximum p]]></description>
<link>http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/imsm/sb/CS-020655.htm</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/imsm/sb/CS-020655.htm</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>LinuxPlanet - Tutorials - Manage a Linux    RAID 10    Storage Server - Linux Software RAID10</title>
<description><![CDATA[Manage a Linux   RAID 10   Storage Server . Linux Software RAID10 . . Carla Schroder . Friday, August 22, 2008 12:44:08 PM . . . Today we'll learn how to monitor, maintain, and make changes in our   RAID 10   array. We'll make it bigger, smaller, safely test failure recovery, and set up monitoring and failure notifications. . In part 2 of this series we learned how to create a   RAID 10   array during a clean, new Kubuntu installation. The same method works with all the *buntus, Debian and CentOS 5.1. However, there is an even easier way the Fedora 8 Anaconda installer supports RA]]></description>
<link>http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/tutorials/6518/1/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linuxplanet.com/linuxplanet/tutorials/6518/1/</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Linux Today - Manage a Linux    RAID 10    Storage Server</title>
<description><![CDATA["Today we ll learn how to monitor, maintain, and make changes in our   RAID 10   array. We ll make it bigger, smaller, safely test failure recovery, and set up monitoring and failure notifications. . "In part 2 of this series we learned how to create a   RAID 10   array during a clean, new Kubuntu installation. The same method works with all the *buntus, Debian and CentOS 5.1. However, there is an even easier way--the Fedora 8 Anaconda installer supports   RAID 10  , and it recognizes existing RAID and LVM volumes without having to resort to the hacks we used last week. In fact the Fedora 8 graphical installer is sleek and fast; in my opi]]></description>
<link>http://www.linuxtoday.com/storage/2008030501226OSHLSV</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.linuxtoday.com/storage/2008030501226OSHLSV</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Rock a Righteous RAID in Your Mac Pro | Mac|Life</title>
<description><![CDATA[You list in your article that   RAID 10   is a Mirror of Stripes, but isn't it in fact RAID 01 that is a Mirror of Stripes while   RAID 10   is a Stripe of Mirrors? . The performance testing I have seen on RAID 01 (mirroring two sets of stripes) has been disappointing due to what would appear to be a flaw in Apples Software RAID which prevents i from performing stripe reads across a mirror. . From what I gather it has the same write speed and very little performance gain in read speed over   RAID 10   (stripe of two sets of mirrors). This lack of performance gain combined with the fact that from what I understand is inferior fault tolerance seems to make it a poor choice over   RAID 10   (striping two sets of mirro]]></description>
<link>http://www.maclife.com/article/rock_a_righteous_raid_in_your_mac_pro</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.maclife.com/article/rock_a_righteous_raid_in_your_mac_pro</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   raid 10      Search Results       raid 10    | MySQL Performance Blog</title>
<description><![CDATA[Even RAID 5 has better performance compared to   RAID 10   (see sequential output block)!!! 200G databases. In the production, RAID 5 + LVM (IBM x3650, database size xeon X5355 running ubuntu 9.04 with Raid 1 array X25-M and   Raid 10   array of 4 x 1 .. With the database configured on the   raid 10   set just showing a table or navigating the phpmyadmin interface takes a couple of them in a raid 1 set and dont have to , MySQL is fine with 6 SAS/SCSI disks in RAID 5 or   RAID 10   before it needs to scale out. Though sure, it depends and I often people dedicate 2 disks in RAID-1 just for OS while OS i.e. you can work with RAID]]></description>
<link>http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?s=raid%2010 =true</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mysqlperformanceblog.com/?s=raid%2010 =true</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:12 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID Levels 0+1 (01) and 1+0 (10)</title>
<description><![CDATA[RAID 01 is a mirrored configuration of two striped sets;   RAID 10   is a stripe across a number of mirrored sets.   RAID 10   and 01 have been increasing dramatically in popularity as hard disks become cheaper and the four-drive minimum is legitimately seen as much less of an obstacle.   RAID 10   provides better fault tolerance and rebuild performance than RAID 01. Both array types provide very good to excellent overall performance by combining the speed of RAID 0 with the redundancy of RAID 1 without requiring parity calculations. . . This illustration shows how files of different sizes are distributed between the drives on an eight-disk RAID 0+]]></description>
<link>http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/multLevel01-c.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/raid/levels/multLevel01-c.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:12 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID level 0, 1, 0+1, 3, 5 and 10 | Advantages, disadvantages and best use</title>
<description><![CDATA[Such a system is sometimes referred to by the combined number: a   RAID 10   system. Advantages Disadvantages Ideal use . RAID-1 is ideal for mission critical storage, for instance for accounting systems. It is also suitable for small servers in which only two disks will be used. RAID 3 . On RAID 3 systems, datablocks are subdivided (striped) and written in parallel on two or more drives. An additional drive stores parity information. You need at least 3 disks for a RAID 3 array. . . Since parity is used, a RAID 3 stripe set can withstand a single disk failure without losing data or access to d]]></description>
<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:05:08 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>RAID RECOVERY LABS -    RAID 10    DATA RECOVERY</title>
<description><![CDATA[RAID 1+0 sometimes called RAID 1 , or   RAID 10  , is similar to a RAID 0+1 with exception that the RAID levels used are reversed —   RAID 10   is a stripe of mirrors. Below is an example where three collections of 120 GB level 1 arrays are striped together to make 360 GB of total storage space. . All but one drive from each RAID 1 set could fail without damaging the data. However, if the failed drive is not replaced, the single working hard drive in the set then becomes a single point of failure for the entire array. If that single hard drive then fails, all data stored in the entire array is lost. As is the case with RAID 0+1, if a failed drive is not replaced in a   RAID 10   configuration then a single uncor]]></description>
<link>http://www.raidrecoverylabs.com/raid_10_data_recovery/</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.raidrecoverylabs.com/raid_10_data_recovery/</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:30 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    Data Recovery,    RAID 10    Failure</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   (also called RAID 1+0) uses a minimum of four drives and additional drives must be added in even numbers. If four drives are used, a pair is first mirrored as in a RAID 1 and then striped as in RAID 0. The total storage capacity is calculated by summing the storage capacity of all the drives in the array and dividing it in half. This makes   RAID 10   very expensive since it uses only half of the total capacity of all the drives.   RAID 10   does offer increased performance over some of the other RAID levels due to the striping that takes place. Since mirroring occurs in   RAID 10  , the failure of one or more drives is tolerable as long as there is only one]]></description>
<link>http://www.rewave.com/raid-10-recovery.htm</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.rewave.com/raid-10-recovery.htm</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 17 Mar 2008 14:11:06 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Windows Partions on    RAID 10    - Tech Support F...</title>
<description><![CDATA[At this point I'm thinking I will setup a   RAID 10   array with the 4 drives. My top priority is redundancy but a little performance improvement is always a good thing. My question is concerning creating Windows partitions on the array. Right now I'm thinking I'll create a 20 Gb partition for the OS and any misc. utilities such as virus protection (this server will be used as the server to 50 clients for Vipre Enterprise virus protection ) and also our accounting package which utilizes Pervasive SQL. I'm not sure how the remainder should be partitioned. Are there any performance advantages/disadvantages to further parti]]></description>
<link>http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-support/windows-nt-2000-2003-server-2008-server/410690-windows-partions-raid-10-a.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.techsupportforum.com/microsoft-support/windows-nt-2000-2003-server-2008-server/410690-windows-partions-raid-10-a.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:12 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    not working</title>
<description><![CDATA[I have an external SATA drive bay setup with a   RAID 10   configuration. The devices manager is saying I need to rebuild drive 3 and drive 1. I have data on the drive that has not been backed up. If I rebuild the two drives, will data be lost? . In RAID 0+1, if the volume is still usable then you haven't lost any data (yet) and rebuilding the drive shouldn't cause any harm. But being paranoid with RAID systems is a healthy attitude and I'd back up all my data before doing anything. It's a really good idea to test these kinds of scenarios BEFORE committing your data to a RAID]]></description>
<link>http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/252115-32-raid-working</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/252115-32-raid-working</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 01:41:29 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>   RAID 10    Data Recovery |    RAID 10    Data Recovery Services |    RAID 10    | RAID Data Recovery</title>
<description><![CDATA[  RAID 10   Data Recovery . DataTech Labs provides fast, professional   RAID 10   data recovery services. Our expert recovery engineers will work around the clock to ensure that your critical data is retrieved as quickly as possible. We understand that each customerâ€™s situation is unique, so we will analyze each hard drive in your   RAID 10   array to determine the best recovery method for each of our clients.   RAID 10   Data Recovery Services . A   RAID 10  , also known as 1+0, requires at least four hard disks. This array is set up as a mirrored stripe, combining th]]></description>
<link>http://www.datatechlab.com/raid-data-recovery/RAID_10.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.datatechlab.com/raid-data-recovery/RAID_10.html</guid>
<pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2009 21:50:30 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Raid 0 vs    Raid 10    performance</title>
<description><![CDATA[1) Putting redundancy aside, would the performance be the same between a 2disk raid 0 and 4 disk   raid 10   setup? I plan on using my 750GB RE3 drives. 2) How much of a performance increase would it be to use my 4ea RE3 drives in a single Raid 0 vs only using 2 disks? My goal is performance, speed, speed and more speed. I was going to get some SSD's but just couldn't put it in my budget so i got the RE3's instead. My original idea was to use the 4 RE3 drives in one Raid 0 and then put my 2ea 1TB drives in Raid 1 and use them to backup the Raid 0 every night. I don't need 3GB of space from using the 4 drives in Raid 0 and would only use all 4 drives if the performance increase is that great.]]></description>
<link>http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/252009-32-raid-raid-performance</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/252009-32-raid-raid-performance</guid>
<pubDate>Sun, 27 Sep 2009 11:25:28 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>400GB Hard Disk Drives in RAID 0, RAID 5 and    RAID 10    Arrays. Part 2 - X-bit labs</title>
<description><![CDATA[Some time ago we compared different hard disk drives in terms of their usability in RAID arrays (for details see our first article called 400GB Hard Disk Drives in RAID 0, RAID 5 and   RAID 10   Arrays: Performance Analysis). Unfortunately, we have not been able to return to that interesting topic for a while, but now we are ready to renew the series of tests. We will continue from the same storage capacity we stopped at in the last test session, namely 400 gigabytes. In the upcoming reviews we will consider newer HDD models with higher-density platters and higher speeds that have appeared on the market recently. . First we want to tell you about the reasons for such testing and the results of the previous test session. . Apart from pure curiosity, the main reason i]]></description>
<link>http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/400gb-raid0510-2.html</link>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/storage/display/400gb-raid0510-2.html</guid>
<pubDate> Tue, 06 Oct 2009 12:19:14 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
