HTPC hardware

[Brian Densmore]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rusty
> 
> --- kurt wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "brad" 
> 
> >  I'm not an expert on raid, but raid 0 is the
> > fastest,
> > splitting data across two drives (no mirroring or duplexing), raid 1
> > is
> > mirroring (basically a full copy on another disk), raid 5 
> (mirroring
> > with
> > parity?) The main increase would come from the SATA interface, being
> > that it
> > is faster than IDE, and currently also faster in seek times to the
> > 15k SCSI
> > drives. Not to mention a WHOLE lot cheaper. Someone correct me if im
> > wrong.
> > 
> > Kurt
> 
> I can't speak to the speed of the drives or their respective
> interfaces, but I have just a bit of knowledge of raid. Raid 0
> (striping ONLY) isn't really raid, since there's no fault 
> tolerance. It
Well, it depends on how you define a RAID. I define it as a Redundant Array
of Inexpensive Disks. ;)
Which  would qualify RAID 0 as *really* RAID. I believe the proposed
implementation was going to be RAID 0+1. Which would give you everything
except parity. So it would be the next best thing to RAID 5 but with better
performance.

$0.02,
Brian