RAID Scaling Charts, Part 2

RAID 5: Stripe Set With Redundancy

This has the advantage that there isn’t a parity hard drive, which may create a bottleneck. But it has the disadvantage of having to work with parity information, whether you’re using a degraded array or recreating a secure state. Should the parity drive of a RAID 3 array crash, you would effectively be working on a RAID 0 array until parity is recreated after you’ve installed a replacement hard drive.

Limits Of RAID 5

Being able to lose a hard drive without losing data sounds promising, but a RAID 5 array does not provide ultimate data safety as many people tend to believe. Yes, data is safe as long as the array is intact, and you will not lose anything should a drive crash. However, data can be compromised easily, because:

  • it can happen that multiple drives out of the same batch fail for the same reason (factory defect or end of life);
  • a degraded RAID 5 does not always offer the usual performance, which may put it under higher stress, probably causing another drive to fail;
  • a RAID 5 reconstruction represents a heavy workload for hard drives, resulting in decreased performance and higher stress for the array;
  • people make mistakes: It happens all the time that an administrator replaces the wrong drive, accidentally eliminating the RAID array.

It is possible to boost data safety beyond the levels of RAID 5 by nesting RAID configurations, which combine two RAID arrays. RAID 5+1 is a good example, as it mirrors a RAID 5 setup onto another RAID 5 array. However, since calculation performance has increased over time, another option has become more popular: RAID 6.

Patrick Schmid
Editor-in-Chief (2005-2006)

Patrick Schmid was the editor-in-chief for Tom's Hardware from 2005 to 2006. He wrote numerous articles on a wide range of hardware topics, including storage, CPUs, and system builds.