On 1 Dec 2017, Wols Lists stated:
Yes it does have advantages, and yes I plan to put a raid-10 array on my
new system, but if reducing wear or protecting data are your priorities,
raid-10 is the wrong choice.
It depends on the access patterns. It's no worse at safeguarding data
than RAID-5 and can be better (some, but not all, combinations of
multiple disk failures will lead to no data loss, something which would
otherwise require RAID-6). It's faster at reads and much faster at
random writes. The cost: possibly quite a lot more spinning rust for the
amount of available storage. (For me, power-consumption considerations
led me to stick with RAID, though I've gone to RAID-6.)
--
NULL && (void)