1. Maintains an exact replica of one disk on another offering 100% fault tolerance.
2. Data redundancy - If one disk fails, data can be recovered from the other.
3. Fault tolerance - Even when one disk fails, the other one can continue functioning and the system continues to function.
4. Quick recreating data when a disk is replaced
1. Reduced data storage capacity a Raid 1 disks capacity is half the physical disk capacity.
2. Raid 1 is slower as it does not improve read or write speeds.
1. Higher cost of implementation due to requiring double the disk capacity.
2. Suited for small operations that don’t require large amounts of storage space. Also suited for operations that are critical requiring high availability and no downtime.
1. Improved …show more content…
Its implementation involves the loss of an entire disks storage space.
2. Can survive failure of only ONE drive but this failure would slow down performance due to data recreation.
3. Once one disk fails, a new disk will require data recreation from the compressed parity data and would take longer.
4. Cost – Require at least 3 disks.
5. Parity segments take up a total of one drives capacity.
6. During recovery of a damaged raid 5 disk, Unrecoverable Data Errors in the ‘good’ disk(s) could make data recovery unsuccessful (raidtips.com, 2011).
1. Suited for small and medium sized businesses where cost implementation is a concern. Offers data protection through fault tolerance and improved write speeds (Chu, 2015).
1. Mirroring provides fault tolerance.
2. Stripping improves access spread.
3. Can service loss of up to two disk drives so long as they are NOT the similar mirrors that are lost.
4. Replacement of a drive does not affect performance.
1. Data storage capacity is 50% disk capacity.
2. Loss of similar mirror images is catastrophic.
3. Risk for catastrophic data loss with simultaneous loss of 2 disks.
1. Suited for large data warehousing operations due to higher implementation costs – needs at least 4
2. Data redundancy - If one disk fails, data can be recovered from the other.
3. Fault tolerance - Even when one disk fails, the other one can continue functioning and the system continues to function.
4. Quick recreating data when a disk is replaced
1. Reduced data storage capacity a Raid 1 disks capacity is half the physical disk capacity.
2. Raid 1 is slower as it does not improve read or write speeds.
1. Higher cost of implementation due to requiring double the disk capacity.
2. Suited for small operations that don’t require large amounts of storage space. Also suited for operations that are critical requiring high availability and no downtime.
1. Improved …show more content…
Its implementation involves the loss of an entire disks storage space.
2. Can survive failure of only ONE drive but this failure would slow down performance due to data recreation.
3. Once one disk fails, a new disk will require data recreation from the compressed parity data and would take longer.
4. Cost – Require at least 3 disks.
5. Parity segments take up a total of one drives capacity.
6. During recovery of a damaged raid 5 disk, Unrecoverable Data Errors in the ‘good’ disk(s) could make data recovery unsuccessful (raidtips.com, 2011).
1. Suited for small and medium sized businesses where cost implementation is a concern. Offers data protection through fault tolerance and improved write speeds (Chu, 2015).
1. Mirroring provides fault tolerance.
2. Stripping improves access spread.
3. Can service loss of up to two disk drives so long as they are NOT the similar mirrors that are lost.
4. Replacement of a drive does not affect performance.
1. Data storage capacity is 50% disk capacity.
2. Loss of similar mirror images is catastrophic.
3. Risk for catastrophic data loss with simultaneous loss of 2 disks.
1. Suited for large data warehousing operations due to higher implementation costs – needs at least 4