If the Clariion CX600 issues writes to cache and performs the physical
write asynchronously, does the stated benefit of raid 10 versus 5
really exists?


On Apr 16, 10:29 am, "Ray" <raymmailbox-n...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Apr 16, 8:54 am, aj <ron...@mcdonalds.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > DB2 LUW v8.2 FP 14 RHAS 2.1
>
> > Not trying to start a flame war or anything, but does anyone have an
> > opinion regarding whether to use Raid 5 or Raid 10 w/ DB2?
>
> > We have an EMC SAN (a Clariion CX600 I believe). My SysAdmin and I
> > are discussing which raid type to use. Several years ago during my
> > Informix DBA days, Art Kagel and other well-informed folks on C.D.I.
> > would occasionally point out how raid 5 w/ database is a BAD idea, and
> > how raid 10 should always be used.
>
> > With SAN advances (cache, memory, speed, etc..), does this still apply?
> > My SysAdmin thinks Raid 5 is a better way to go.
>
> > All of my tablespace containers are DMS (typically 2 gigabytes each),
> > except for temp space, which are SMS.
>
> > TIA
>
> > aj
>
> RAID 10 is still the better way to go for a database with a lot of
> writes. For something like a data warehouse it might not be so
> critical.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -