Raid 0 is called striping. The '0' means it provides no redundancy or fault
tolerance.

It divides the filesystem and files into blocks that you define when
building the array, and then stores those blocks on consecutive hard drives.

Thusly, if you stored your 20GB file on a single SATA100 drive, you will get
a theoretical speed of 100MB/s data throughput



Now, if you use RAID0 across multiple drives, say 6 * SATA100, and depending
on the interconnect you use (PCI, PCI-X, PCI-EX, PCI-EX4, PCI-EX8) you can
then get speeds nearing the throughput of your interconnect / bus system.
This is because you essentially multiply the speed of each device by the
number of devices you have (6 * 100MB/s = 600MB/s).

Naturally, having 50 SATA drives hanging off one PCI slot will only get you
~160MB/s, as that's the limit of the old style PCI bus.



Here's one comparison of Interconnect methods

http://www.computerworld.com/computerworld/records/images/chart/pci_pcix.gif



There may be inaccuracies in the above posting - I haven't had coffee yet...



Nige.





From: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:firebird-support@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of svanderclock
Sent: Wednesday, 18 November 2009 8:36 AM
To: firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [firebird-support] Re: Raid 0 or not ?





I know but we are only looking for performance !

For a Database of 20 GB, regarding the speed, is it better to use RAID 0 or
not ? I read that read 0 is twice more faster BUT is it true when we speak
about only one file (the .GDB) ?

Thanks you by advance
stephane

--- In firebird-support@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:firebird-support%40yahoogroups.com> , "Anderson Farias"
<peixedragao@...> wrote:

>
> Hi,
>
> |For a Database of 20 GB, regarding the speed, is it better to use RAID 0

or

> not ? I read that read 0 is twice more faster BUT is
> |it true when we speak about only one file (the .GDB) ?
>
> I wouldn't use RAID 0 !! It would not be safe for your Database.
>
> RAID 1 is simple (cheap), safe and will also improve speed for your reads.

> I've been using it with great results.
>
> Also, If you can afford and need something even more "secure" than you may

> want to try RAID 10.
>
>
> Regards,
> Anderson
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]