 |
BAARF |
|
|
|
|
| # | Name | Comment |
| 0+1 | Juan Loaiza | Wrote the SAME paper, and has argued for many years against RAID-5. |
| 1 | Cary Millsap | Wrote articles against RAID-5 many years ago. |
| 2 | Jared Still | Has a "No RAID-5" hat which he wears on a regular basis |
| 3 | James Morle | Author of Sane SAN |
| 4 | Tim Gorman | Founder of People's Front for the BAARF - radical, militant splinter group |
| Raid 5 | Peter Gram | Has helped many customers out of their RAID-5 misery over the years |
| 6 | Mogens Nørgaard | |
| 7 | Tim Onions | |
| 8 | Alex Høffner | |
| 9 | Gunnar Bjarnason | |
| 1+0 | Torben Holm | Groupie |
| 11 | Carel-Jan Engels | Founder of RFLF (Raid 5 Liberation Front) and PMSS (Poor Man's Storage Solution). |
| 12 | Morten Egan | Convinced the Oracle Raw Iron Development team to abandon RAID-5 and use RAID-1+0 in stead. |
| 13 | Leif Barbré Knudsen | Specifically asked to become member no 13 before member no 12 was found. |
| 14 | Kim Poulsen | |
| 15 | David Kurtz | |
| 16 | Richard Ji | |
| 17 | Stephen Andert | "I've alienated so many SA's that they could start their own country <grin>" |
| 18 | John Kanagaraj | Have been fighting RAID-F for about 3 years now. |
| 19 | Anjo Kolk | Has placed the BAARF logo on OraPerf.com |
| 20 | Barbare Baker | Do NOT believe the liars and infidels. We have no BAARF in our computer room, nor will we allow an invasion of BAARF. |
| 21 | Rachel Carmichael | I've been fighting RAID-F for what seems like forever. Not usually winning, but fighting. Mine not to reason why, mine but to fight and die |
| 22 | Frank Pettinato | |
| 23 | Brian Peasland | I've been fighting Raid-F for many, many years now. I currently have a multi-terabyte system which we want redudancy, but the powers-that-be won't fork over the cash for RAID 1 ro RAID 0+1. So RAID 5 it is. I told them that data loads would take twice as long. And sure enough, they do. But they still insist on RAID 5 as the RAID level of choice. Ugh........ |
| 24 | Paul Baumgartel | When I arrived at my new job, I found RAID 5 everywhere, and a sys admin who wanted to build my new database servers that way...I smote the old systems and set the new ones on the right path.I would be proud to be associated with your movement. |
| 25 | Bill "Shrek" Thater | OK i'm in. I've been at this for a while, but damagement would rather believe the salesdroids that they guy actually having to deal with the stuff. |
| 26 | Dick Goulet | Our storage team won't even respond to me anymore when I ask for the manufacturer's rating for non-cached I/Os per second & number of controllers, RAID level, striping, etc... All I get is 'why do you want to know that' and 'what application is this for'... BARRF will stop the debilitating headaches since I will just refuse to talk about it anymore. Our storage team won't even respond to me anymore when I ask for the manufacturer's rating for non-cached I/Os per second & number of controllers, RAID level, striping, etc... All I get is 'why do you want to know that' and 'what application is this for'... BARRF will stop the debilitating headaches since I will just refuse to talk about it anymore. |
| 27 | Don Burleson | I have never seen any reason not to use RAID 0+1 (RAID10) with Oracle databases, but plenty of shops suffering because of ignorant vendor recommendations. |
| 28 | Peter McLarty | I was introduced to database servers in 1997 starting with a SCO server with Progress that was running RAID 5, For the size of the company it didn't run too bad, but as I learnt to manage that database. And learnt the benefits of having RAID 0+1 I decided that when I upgraded the system I was having no more RAID 5. My boss gave me the budget and I got the new array and lost the RAID 5. Performance went up splendidly. |
| 29 | Gudmundur Bjarni Josepsson | |
| 30 | David Phillips | |
| 31 | Geoff Smith | |
| 32 | Nils Bøjden | Finally somebody speeks up for us poor sods trying to get the databases to perform decently. Use the RAID F# for word document, speadsheets or pictures of women dressed interestingly, but never ever for the databases. |
| 33 | Michael Brown | Okay, I give up. As much as I try to stay out of these discussions, I just got drawn into one on OAUGNet-DBA. Give me my member number. |
| 34 | Leif Arildsen | I think it should be called RAARF (Raid Against Any Raid Five, Four, Free, Fone. |
| 35 | Yannick Gagnon | I'm fighting against those DBA of the outsourcing side that are putting all production system(mostly OLTP) on big RAID-5 on SAN (those big Hitachi one) justifying it that they don't have any perf problem since they can put up to 32 GB of write-cache($$$). |
| 36 | Daniel Fink | I think that this should be RAID-5Z (Z is the closet character that is a 'mirror' image of 5). |
| 37 | Bjørn Engsig | Undskyld! for having failed in the Battle |
| 38 | Art S. Kagel | I've been fighting the anti-RAID5 fight since 1995 and have just one thing to say: NO RAID5 NO RAID5 NO RAID5 NO RAID5 NO RAID5 NO RAID5 NO RAID5 |
| 39 | Bjarne Hakonarson | |
| 40 | Tue Marker | Has suggested a course in how to argument against your storage vendor. |
| 41 | Paul Vallee | I've fought fo many battlef against RF I've loft count. I've loft fome of courfe but won my fair fhare, and I've got fe fcarf to prove it! |
| 42 | Ron Thomas | |
| 43 | Piet de Visser | (Raid, the Cache, and everything)++ |
| 44 | Tim Johnston | Hey... I'm jealous!!! BAARF! BAARF! BAARF! |
| 45 | Jesper Haure Nørrevang | I want to be a BAARF member now - I had a meeting with a RAID-5 salesman yesterday. |
| 46 | Don Granaman | Still waiting for RAID-42... |
| 47 | Robyn Anderson Sands | I'm a DBA with many battle scars from fighting RAID-F and other bad implementation choices. I've been called a primadona and a technical purist and taken lots of abuse on this subject. I'd love to put your logo next to my UNIX Live Free or Die license plate ... |
| 48 | Kimberly L. Tripp | Wow - I like you Oracle people more and more the more I know you! It's really only recently that I've taken on Oracle people as friends and so far I like most of you (except for those of you who are bad influences in terms of beer :)... Seriously though - it's not surprising that all of us think similar thoughts for databases and unanimously agree that RAID 5 is poor man's fault tolerance and a great sacrifice of cost over performance. In the end it's just not worth it! Ah, I feel better already! I guess this is the first step...... |
| 49 | Ole Wissing | Once upon a time in a little country, not too far away, there was a RAID 5 which in the beginning was based upon 12-14 drives including 1 hot spare. Everything went fine. When a drive crashed, the spare was eager to help and took over the work work without any problem. The IO performance was not an issue, because this system was only feeding a fileserver. During the time the array was expanded and expanded and ended upon 25-30 drives that all lived together in total harmony. Then, one hot summer day in July, two drives crashed at the same time and the RAID was totally crashed because the risc 0/00 was the same as before, but now it should cover many more drives. The array had to be rebuild from tape = 800 Gb = 1 day downtime = expensive. Did anybody learn anything, Nope, RAID 5 is still being used in arrays with an ever increasing amount of drives. When will they ever learn ? |
| 50 | Carl Bruhn | I'm in one of those outsourcing companies, but we can think, read and understand (at least some of us :-) So for me and my databases. No more RAIDF. ( and even better end of discussion). |
| 51 | Lon White | You're going to be using RAID F... Why not, after all, what would an Oracle DBA know about the best setup for Oracle Databases??? |
| 52 | Rick Goudeau | I have to agree with BAARF principles. I have spent much time arguing with with management who have been sold snake oil about raid 5. Since impact of Raid 5 is so small, it is curious why rebuilding the file systems to raid 0+1 significantly outperforms the previous environment. Oh well on to the next battle! I think the BAARF party makes more sense than the 2 major political parties in the USA. |
| 53 | James Petts | A sysadmin who forces RAID-F on a poor suffering DBA is no better than a car-hire company that will only rent you an Edsel |
| 54 | Hans Forbrich | RAID - one of the few cases in modern math where 0+1 is truly greater than 5. Just tell the accountants that they can do their own backups and restores if they think otherwise. |
| 55 | Andrew Hamm | If a supplier screws up the configuation I just tear down and completely reinstall, and then tell the engineers what I've done. They probably go pale and faint over their wasted hours, but they never do it again. Actions speak louder than words! |
| 56 | Eckard Potgieter | As you all know, afraid stands for -> against five-raid, so all I can say is: Be afraid, be very afraid. |
| 57 | Jeff Eberhard | Finally had a chance to use BAARF. Sys Admin wanted to know if the new disks should be configured as Raid 5. BAARF!!!!! |
| 58 | Henrik Verup | I would like to join the Baarf world, so I can learn how to advise customers not to use Raid5, avoiding getting into too many undskyld-sessions afterwards. |
| 59 | Hans Driessen | Again helping out another customer who needed perfomance, but was forced to buy Gbytes instead... |
| 60 | Steve Montgomerie | Where's the link on how to dispose of overzealous raid-5 UNIX admins? |
| 61 | Thomas Day | Tired of explaining to customers that RAID5 does not mean that you don't need backups. |
| 62 | Paul Drake | The last storage subsystem I specified had 42 drives mounted on 3 dual channel SCSI-RAID controllers, a mix of RAID 10 and RAID 1. RAID 5? Not on my watch. |
| 63 | Mark W. Farnham | Clearly, I have long since tasted more than enough vomit in my mouth due to useless blather regarding RAID-F***. Long live Baarf in its quest for less barf. |
| 64 | Prashant Khanolkar | |
| 65 | Radu Caulea | I have to deal almost every day with RAID-5 black boxes (read optimize Oracle databases already installed on this type of architecture) and I am sort of tired of customers' surprise when hearing 'Oracle mirroring of redologs means more than raid mirroring of redologs'. Long life to BAARF. |
| 66 | Christophe Tsobgny | I have been working on several implementations and it seems like Raid 5 has always been mandatory, the funny thing is that many years ago after reading about different types of Raid I was wondering why we did not implement Raid 0+1 (Raid10). It was really funny because i was convinced at the time that stripe and mirrorIt was really funny because i was convinced at the time that stripe and mirror was the best choice but somehow top level decisions always made us implement Raid 5 - it was as if we would received the storage systems with Raid 5 already installed. |
| 67 | Diego Pafumi | I hope these docs will help all DBA's to undertsand how CRITICAL is to avoid RAID5. Most of DBA's and Sys Admins has NO IDEA about RAID5 performance. |
| 68 | Thomas Hedemann | That's it! I've had it. I'm in. From now on I will simply tell the sysadmin that "I refuse to have a battle of wit with an unarmed opponent" and not exchange another word with him until he's read the BAARF articles. All of them! |
| 69 | Joe Testa | I figure I have to wait for a while to get BAARF party membership #69, bwahahahahahha |
| 70 | Michael Brown | #70 Very good. It's the IQ of my sysadmin. You know him. He's the one that's constantly touting Raid-5 to management. |
| 71 | Maheswara Rao | |
| 72 | Lars Bo Vanting | I thought this RAID-5 discussion had been ended long time ago and storage vendors had become serious, but I was wrong... |
| 73 | Ashok Sharma | |
| 74 | V Rao Kanneganti | |
| 75 | J Muller | |
| 76 | Rich Holland | Sign me up! I hate RAID-5 with a passion. |
| 77 | Piers Truman-Baker | |
| 78 | Peter Lynch | As a freelance performance specialist who earns a living fixing slow databases, I say RAID-5 is great. Let's have more of it everywhere and keep me in a job! |
| 79 | Phil Kurjan | |
| 80 | Dennis Heisler | |
| 81 | Raj Jamadagni | |
| 82 | Sten Rognes | Despite my Viking-blood, temper and physics I've lost my battle against RAID50 here on the other side of the pond. I am with you. Can I please join the BAARF party? |
| 83 | Larry Wolfson | Sign me up! |
| 84 | Senthil Anand.G | "I'm Senthil, a victim of RAID 5.. I'm working as an oracle dba in National Investment Funds Company, Muscat... its a monarch's company with tons of money and no brains... I joined up at the fag end of a new project implementation.... and the machine is on a IBM cluster with a raid 5 as the central storage... and unfortunately for my horror this is a RAID 5 on a pool of 3 disks... now this is a real disaster for me.... all the files including logs, control files have been dumped on the same array.... and moreover the database is to support a hybrid application .... and the decision makers out here for the hardware feel it as unprofessional to comment on their decision of hardware... This is real hell.... |
| 85 | Mark Bobak | "If there's enough cache it always works fine!" |
| 86 | Konstantinos Hairopoulos | ...a part of my job is system integration with Oracle and Unix platforms, another part of my job is trying things to run faster. RAID-5 a favorite myth for scalability, reduntancy. I am very glad joining this group....." |
| 87 | Jan Overgaard | |
| 88 | Rune Rasmussen | I need to become a member - after 20 years of databases on raid 5 with the never ending "what can we do to improve performance" I'm ready to join anything that will combat it. |
| 89 | Cord Lange | We want to join your BAARF world, because we made also bad experiences with RAID5 systems. We think the worst idea is a ATA-2-SCSI RAID 5 system on a single channel... We use SCSI or FC drives as RAID10 with min. two channels plus hotfix drives - never made bad experiences with that ;-) |
| 90 | Bernhard Gramberg | I am ready to join, because RAID-5 has two other drawbacks: 1. people forget backups. 2. nobody cares. Re 1.) One answer to the question of a customer, having lost all data, was: "RAID-5 is my backup!". Re 2.) Nobody cares: And another two urgent questions: Who knows, that the first drive of Raid-5 crashed ? Nobody. Who knows, that the second drive of Raid-5 crashed ? Everybody! |
| 91 | Sam Gentsch | Sign me up, I fight this battle daily at work... Everyone is convinced the cache makes up for any RAID5 penalty and that RAID 5 is so much safer than 0+1...driving me nuts! |
| 92 | Mark Strickland | I want to understand clearly the issues with Raid-F so I can communicate clearly to decision makers in the client companies in which I work. |
| 93 | Duc Nguyen | Good. Simple |
| 94 | Sassan Karai | Terabiting Raid 5. Grey hair says there is no cheap, large, fast disk space. Dont starve your DB server with slow disks, feed its memory. Make it BAARF = better architecture and real fast |
| 95 | Morten Amstrup | Now, I'm not an actor (DBA = Death Becomes the administrating Actor???), but I would still claim: Performance is everything! Let's BAARF!!! |
| 96 | Christopher Gait | I'm joining BAARF because Mogens said so. Danes used to be great hulking Viking types who used axes as toothpicks, so you simply don't want to say no. Oh, and also I've attempted to fix up one too many production instances to find that their redo is on RAID5. BAARF! |
| 97 | Andrew Mobbs | I never again want to have to explain why RAID 1+0 is faster and more reliable for any given number of spindles for this workload. It's easier just to tell the implementation people a kitten dies every time RAID-F is used. |
| 98 | Henrik Rasmussen | Heard about the Parity/Pain stuff about a year ago.... Oh, and your database who has many writes every day and runs on RAID F doesn't perform properly - no shit, Sherlock? |
| 99 | Mario Broodbakker | If there's enough cache it always works fine!, he said while looking at log file write times of 50ms and more |
| 100 | Mark Morris | As chief architect for storage for Teradata, I pretty much singlehandedly killed off RAID-5 in favor of RAID-1 for Teradata in 1999 as the transition from 4GB to 9GB disks occurred. Yeah, there were a few die-hards, but anyone still using it with today's disk sizes is insane. I believe the case can be made that Patterson, Gibson, and Katz set the storage industry behind by a decade with the lousy ideas of RAID-Fee/Fo/Five. |
| 101 | Gaja Krishna Vaidyanatha | As the guy who played the "lead role" in the BAARF Musical, having read the weirdest script in my amateur acting career and having sung from freaky modified lyrics of popular QUEEN songs, I don't see WHY NOT! |
| 102 | Connor McDonald | Because 102 is 42 in base 25. And because SAN's are driving me inSANe |
| 103 | Kevin Fries | This stuff just kills a system. BAARF on. |
| 104 | Colin Bull | I have just been given this gem by a salesman -
RAID-DP (double parity) basically gives 4,500 times the resilience of RAID-4. yes, I believe it. |
| 105 | Bob McAusland | Client : I want resilience, what do I need? Money no object. Me : Disks are cheap now, go for mirroring, not R5. Client : So R5 is cheaper? Me : Only marginally, but mirroring gives you .... Client : So its R5 then! |
| 106 | Ally McIntyre | Curious. It has the same sound and subsequent nausea that I get when I have drunk too much. |
| 107 | zach friese | baarf! |
| 108 | Claus Busk Andersen | Enough IS enough! |
| 109 | Aaron Nelson | BAARF! |
| 110 | Van Driessche Erik | When will R5 be dead ? |
| 111 | David McCarron | I accepted RAID-F and went with the flow. All I had to do was forget anything I thought I knew about disks. This all came about when one of the engineers from our prefered hardware supplier told me it was not possible to create a partition across the outer edge of the disks platters. I gathered from this statement that disk technology had evolved so much that it now lived up to the glossy brochures and the sales pitch. What with 2Gb of cache and expensive fibre disks, what could I possibly have to worry about ( Q. Is the fibre used in the bearings of the disk spindles to make them spin faster and with less friction, so reducing latent seek times ? That must be a question for "The Challange", maybe I'll win a T-shirt !! ) But it has proved to be more efficient in one sense, now I don't have to do so much analysis to find out what my database is waiting for - I always know where to look first. Next I'm going to get a Solid State Disk array and put RAID-F on that too ! I love it !! |
| 112 | William Shipway | F time has been and gone; let's get back to the three R's - Realistic RAID Recommendations. |
| 113 | Lee McCann | We have no choice but to place our UNDO & TEMP & REDO on RAID5 because that is all we have; BARRF! |
| 114 | Simon Cole | Ahhh - I love the sound of a crammed cache in the morning. Sounds like victory... |
| 115 | Bassam Zahran | Interested in RAID |
| 116 | Peter James Hitchman | Lost the argument long ago. The budget rules OK. |
| 117 | Yuri van Buren | The Battle has to continue! With disksizes growing and growing we get much more data with much lesser throughput. IO will be the main bottleneck for scalability the coming years. |
| 118 | Stephen Booth | Why, oh why, do a certain storage vendor keep peddling their RAID4 arrays? And why do managers listen to them. |
| 119 | Robert de Laat | Never too late to join a club with common sense |
| 120 | Yoann Mainguy | Tired of "tunig" databases over Raid-F. Tired of sysadmins who don't really try to understand. |
| 121 | Todd Bourne | I have been battling SAN Vendors, Managers, Disk Admins, Sys Admins and DBAs for years. RAIDF is BAARFING madness. I am sick of vendors and admins saying "trust me.. striping and caching will fix everything". Enough is enough! |
| 122 | Benny Arbjerg Pedersen | No more 3-4-5 |
| 123 | Mike Badar | Just say no to Mr. Man. Those who know, know. Those who don't follow the cattle. |
| 124 | Sven Schuran | I have ask someone, what is best for my database, he said RAID10. I checked it in the Internet and I got the Opinion it is true. Later we had to buy new Servers, a oOnsultant said, just use RAID5. I said neverever and got my Raid10. And know i found this page and have to join. |
| 125 | JP Nandi | Good One for KM |
| 126 | Les Hollis | Been against RAID5 since I started as a DBA in '92. "Give me 1+0....or give me death" (to paraphrase a great american hero) Current position we are using RAID5 but my incessant bitching finally won them over. We have a new 20TB array on the floor that will be striped 1+0.... "VICTORY to the masses!!!!!!" |
| 127 | Joel Garry | It's about time for RAID-5 to be more generally accepted, so must be about time for me to be a dinosaur against it. |
| 128 | Anthony McCollum | I currently have my first Raid5 system. Performance is not good. I work in the spatial arena so writes are very large and the penalty is very heavy in the R-5 config. Im looking into R-0+1 config as we speak. |
| 129 | Michael J. Hillanbrand II | I hate RAID almost as much as raw files - but given the choice I'll take raw on LOTS of disk and manage the reliability and replication myself. |
| 130 | Juan de Villeros | I have suffered raid5 data failure twice in my company. Every time I was able to say "you see! raid5 is not secure". Now everything we do is mirrored. |
| 131 | Jonathan Van Houtte | Have been agitating against RAID 5 ("the greatest thing since striped bread") for years. |
| 132 | Ole Thomsen | Better late than never |
| 133 | Ian Carney | Hallas accolyte and founder of the Provisional Wing of BAARF. I also went university in Baarf...
Once had a argument with a Sequent engineer who thought I was mad - he was probably right but not in this context |
| 134 | Jim Avery | I've had enough of poor performance, especially when doing anything which is bigger than the huge cache on our system. |
| 135 | Dave Scott | Having seen a great presentation at Oracle UKOUG 4 years ago involving glasses of water to demonstrate raid levels - I have been a firm convert to the anti RAID 5 et al brigade |
| 136 | Bernard (DUL) van Duijnen | There are already enough databases to repair, I do not need raidF for more work. |
| 137 | Teresa Schoen | Can't pass up joining any organization with such a creative name :-) |
| 138 | Robert Fenstermacher | Enough IS enough |
| 139 | John A. Kostelac | I see client after client who ask me to help them make their systems perform better and then reassure me that I need not look at the IO subsystem as it is RAID5. Invariably, that is where I find signifcant problems. Oh well.... |
| 140 | Frank Kalis | The more I get to know about RAID, the less I see a use in RAID-F. |
| 141 | Augusto Cesar Vianna de Carvalho | No RAID! No RAID! No RAID! No RAID! |
| 142 | Chris Du-Pond | Simply put, I had enough issues with customers in RAID-5 that I have come to hate it...Plain and simply it is not a good solution for Oracle despite large caches in newer storage array systems.. |
| 143 | Suraj Krishnan | Have recommended against Raid 5 to atleast a dozen customers. |
| 144 | Geoffry Trembley | Tired of Fighting NetApp Salesmen |
| 145 | wan chiun keat | Great info about the RAID. Recommend by someone from Forums |
| 146 | Vijay Cherukuri | Worst experience with RAID5 |
| 147 | Arie Mars | Mostly because of the beer or two... |
| 148 | Gary Alan Myers | This is GREAT STUFF!!! I have argued against RAID5 for years and years and referred people to Oracle's "SAME" protocol (Stripe and Mirror EVERYTHING) ... but some customers are still sold on the idea that a "30%" disk integrity overhead is better than "100%" ... until, of course, they have a catastrophic drive failure; and why does it always seem to be the parity drive that goes out!!!??? |
| 149 | Brian Kush | Who cares about RAID anyway.... I only have one drive in my laptop. |
| 150 | Crispin Proctor | More needs to be done to let people know that the "default" for arrays should not be RAID5. I have had 2 Catastrophic failures with 5 (200GB volume) and NON with RAID1+0 on a 12TB volume!!! Long live 1+0 |
| 151 | Richard Jacobs | Be different SAME is good!!! Long live ASM!!! A seasoned campaigner against RAID 5 |
| 152 | Martin Gamtofte | Just cause..... |
| 153 | Erling Skaale | It's better to be fast than wrong |
| 154 | Steen Vincentz Jensen | Used to believe that noone would ever dream of using a worse kind of Raid than Raid 5 - but have now discovered that one of our customers is using a SAN with Raid 53 - and that is worse!!!! |
| 155 | Ronald Gill | My main reason for joining BAARF is that I stayed in the Grange hotel where it was founded just about a month before the founding, oh yes,and I really hate RAID5. |
| 156 | Nelio Kubo | Information is Priceless. Performance and High Availability are everything. |
| 157 | Antoni Quintarelli | Still being confronted with organisation using SAN RAID5 technolgy and 100% disk utilisation. Will they ever learn..... |
| 158 | Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA | Sometimes it just take guts to take a stand against nonsense... now if only someone would do the same to all this 'SQL is relational' and objects nonsense |
| 159 | Rasmus Jessop | Comments : I just happened to come across this "nice" little note on Metalink
Note:38281.1 What types of files are suitable for placement on RAID-5 devices? Placement of data files on RAID-5 devices is likely to give the best performance benefits, as these are usually accessed randomly. More benefits will be seen in situations where reads predominate over writes. THIS JUST HAS TO STOP !!! NO MORE RAID-5 HORROR STORIES ! |
| 160 | Ted Coyle | I've seen RAID5 up close, and I don't like it... |
| 161 | Zoran Gagi | Keep the storage vendors honest :) - with a large random IO working set SAN cache is close to useless - buy lots of spindles and use RAID10 |
| 162 | Petri Tumppila | Please teach the storagefolks to use calculators. They'd earn more if they'd sell raid10 instead of 5. |
| 163 | Taral Desai | I want to be a expert in this oracle world of data |
| 164 | Michael Dinh | I just so tired of brain-washed system administrators who don't know anything other than RAID5. |
| 165 | James L. Kendall | I have believed in this since I read Cary's paper back when it was an internal Oracle document (I WAS an employee at the time!). In the 10 years since, I have learned to just allow people to make the mistakes that they are determined to make - sort of as if they were teenagers! |
| 166 | Brian R. Day | Development support for SAP Inc. managing all Oracle customers. Subcontracted to SAP from Oracle Corp. RAID 5 .... ARGH! |
| 167 | Douglas E. Marsh | Stick it to the RAID 5 man brother! |
| 168 | Neil Chandler | The SAN administrator will only ever ask my how much SPACE I need. |
| 169 | Jeroen Langeveld | Heard enough nonsense from so-called SAN experts... |
| 170 | Brunell Martineau | RAID five is old and it sucks. |
| 171 | Tony Rogerson | Your site is excellant and just what the RDBMS space needs, i'm sick and tired of people going the RAID 5 route, all too many 'sys admins' think file server - arrrrr, you also need to set a site up explaining what cache is too and why a program, in my case SQL Server takes so much memory - often called 'a memory leak' by sys admins. |
| 172 | Werner Kirsch | I was totally pleased on a whole community sharing my personal problems with RAID5 and the vendors behavior of neglecting all complaints with statements like 'the cache is big enough to handle your requests' or 'we have no problem with your random writes'. |
| 173 | Vedran Dinter | Go BAARF! |
| 174 | Casey Jordan | I am a Oracle DBA that has been fighting RAID5 for years. Just when I thought like I coudn't fight anymore I found your site. I am now imspired to keep on fighting. |
| 175 | Mark J. Kounalis | IBM - Shark - do I really need to say more? |
| 176 | Li-Shan Cheng | SAN Admin: Ok we have RAID-5 or RAID-S, they are similar. Currently we have 6 TB in our EMC DMX2000 SAN, how much space do you need? Me: Please can I have my space configured in RAID 1+0? SAN Admin: No, we waste too much space that way. Me: But I only need 400GB for my transactional system! SAN Admin: Talk with your manager, these disks are very expensive! |
| 177 | Örjan Lundberg | After spending one week to prove that RAID10 is what the customer wants for their Streams AQ env (10GB or so of queue data) it is good to find a whole site dedicated to the data. (This is people that wanted to disable the array cache since they where afraid of loosing data in the cache) |
| 178 | Keith Massner | NO NO NO!!! No Raid 5! |
| 179 | Mike Wojcinski | I've spent way to many hours arguing with Sys admins and DBA's discussing the merits of RAID-10 and the cons of RAID-5... DIE RAID-5 DIE... DIE... |
| 180 | Klaus Dittrich | I'm just fed up discussing "What's cheap now" instead of "What's best in the long term"... |
| 181 | Joze Senegacnik | My past experiences with RAID5 used by my customers forced me to join BAARF. |
| 182 | Sean Ivusic | Having information to convincingly convince clients to use RAID10 / 1+0 / 0+1 rather than RAID-F (5,4,3) helps significantly. Besides, I hate RAID-5 ;) |
| 183 | Jan-marten Spit | RAID5 should be regarded as a weapon of mass obstruction. Any RAID5 system can be preemptivly invaded and burned down to the ground. |
| 184 | Frank Fekkes | Most of the SAN now goes Fm it is becoming a disease. |
| 185 | David Buchholz | NO RAID 5 !! Databases love RAID 0+1. May RAID 5 return to the dark abyss from which it was first conjured up, never to be seen or heard from again. |
| 186 | Guido Jimenez M. | Nice web page. |
| 187 | Jim Hambleton | If raid-5 did not exist, we would not ever have invented it. |
| 188 | David Lee | Excellent sentiments I could agree more, RAID-F is rubbish |
| 189 | John Fjelsted Larsen | This war is not over yet, BAARF is needed now more than ever. |
| 190 | Frank Hamersley | At last my decade of paid subscriptions is recognised! |
| 191 | Brainiac 5 | Folks, you can't imagine how proud I am of finally being able to sport a RAID 5! I dreamed of that for 5 years, at the least. So how can you dare to burst my beloved bubble? And you know what, I don't care how dangerous it is compared to RAID10 - I used to go single-disk-no-backups all my life and this feels so much better now. So consider me the official mole. I will ignore all warnings, not back up, rely on my RAID5 and promise to post my all-data-lost horror story soon. Well. Or maybe not. Thanks for the education. And the burp, eh, baarf. I joined because of the cool name I guess. |
| 192 | Frits Hoogland | The RAID-F keeps popping up everywhere. With SAN/NAS, we enter a whole new era of IO tuning. |
| 193 | Albert Bertilsson | Because it works. |
| 194 | Phil West | The SAN people are easily startled, but they'll soon be back, and in greater numbers. Spent 18 months on one site battling to get access to the physical SAN layout details and fighting the 'It is SAN. It is fast' mantra - and won |
| 195 | Douglas Coan | Basic due diligence into determining if technology advances over the last 5 years makes raid 5 a remotely viable option for a 10TB data warehouse lead me to BAARF in more ways than one. I guess that the laws of mathematics and physics that used to 'slightly hinder' raid 5 still exist. Perhaps someone will get this resolved once that whole speed of light nut is cracked. |
| 196 | Thomas Presslie | I'm proud to say that I've already won the battle against RAID F at my place of employment - I'm Scottish after all. I now need to find somewhere else to battle now. Let me know, I'll be there! |
| 197 | Aaron Werman | I am here representing the RIOT-BUST-ROT (RAID Is Only To Be Used Storing To Read-Only Tablespaces) front. We demand parity! I warn you - we will not quietly hand over our caches! Redundancy is the hobgoblin of small imaginations. |
| 198 | Andrey Kriushin | Switching to mirror+stripe helped one of biggest russian mobile phone service provider to meet throughput requirements. Rise by a factor of 4-5. After half a year of argueing. Enough is enough. Never more. |
| 199 | Erik Swinkels | Finally got rid of the last RAID-f volumes and feel free to join now :-) |
| 200 | David J. Clark | Thanks to RAID-5, I get to be an IT consultant helping companies improve database performance by removing RAID-5 ! |
| 201 | Bob Sneed | TANSTAAFL, world! I can't say categorically "don't use RAID5", because it's useful in some contexts - but don't complain about its performance. Host-based (versus controller-based) is especially performance-inhibiting! Understand the physics, make informed decisions, and enjoy life! |
| 202 | Hitesh Thanki | Bring out your RAIDS |
| 203 | Yue.Guo | I don't like Raid 3,4,5.I only like Raid0+1 |
| 204 | Rob Duke | I am tired of fighting the RAID-F battle from a position of having to prove that it is wrong. |
| 205 | Chad Dinerman | I am sick of fixing broken raid 5 systems and it's time people learned about the dangers. |
| 206 | James Hamilton | Disk space is cheap. I/O capacity is the furthest thing from cheap. RAID-5 has been killing us for years. Make it stop. |
| 207 | Kevin Closson | I have at least eleventeen reasons to loathe RAID5. This form of RAID is a wee bit like sliding down a mile long razorblade into a bucket of salt. The only remedy is to drink until it hurts and then BAARF until it feels better. Having said that, I suspect I've been mixing my drinking with my thinking. OK, I need to count how many successfull systems I've personally been involved with that were RAID 1+0 with hundreds of spindles ... ready, set, go... this is going to take a while ... |
| 208 | Frank B Hansen | After running a modify script against a Raid 5 DB for 2*42 hours, I have to join forces :o) |
| 209 | Mike Hinds | RAID 5 is fine, only if one prefers mediocre performance as well as mediocre redundancy. At the price of media today, why not the best? More to the point, why not noticably improve our job results? |
| 210 | Jim Carter | After losing 3 RAID 5 (aka CRAP - Can't Really Afford Performance) volumes due to multiple disk failures at two different job sites, he fights the good fight each day. |
| 211 | Jarmo Alatalo | They said that Disks for the SAN box is expensive. It's true but think about how expensive it'll be to recover Terabyte database. |
| 212 | Steve Gresham | After having to restore a Raid-5 setup by kicking two dead drives with my steelcap boot after the server was in a fire, I denounce all setups where only two drives need to die to make my life hell.... |
| 213 | Marlon Davis | To get assistance whenever vendors convince management to purchase a SAN solution anb use RAID5 only array |
| 214 | Michael Stoveken | Enough with ServeRAID, rebuilding arrays, defunct drives, and all the bull that goes allong with striped redundancy. RAID-1 is the only RAID I believe in and after my latest bout with an old town hall IBM Netfinity server and its RAID-5 configuration I will never support another RAID-5 environment. |
| 215 | Chieu Tran | In the mid-1990s I was doing a lot of Oracle benchmarking for a US-based hardware vendor. When management pushed me into using RAID-5 we kept coming last/second last in any benchmark against other vendors. It took me about 6 months to convince people that striping and mirroring was the way to go if management still cared about winning in benchmarking. The sad fact was although we stopped using RAID-5 in benchmarking, the salespeople still flogged RAID-5 to our customers. |
| 216 | Karl Miller | Just lost a prod server to RAID5. All I asked for a 0+1 for 200GB. Hey, world..0+1!=5 |
| 217 | Dave Dhiren | Oh No, No More RAID 5 |
| 218 | Roman Klesel | Endless discussions, debugging and configuration sessions in order to work around poor I/O due to RAID-5 configurations. |
| 219 | Jerry Hosford | Cutting through endless Oracle speak in pursuit of a direct answer. |
| 220 | Juan Martín Guillén | Don't know if RAID 5 is bad or not, but my dog barks something like BAARF, BAARF!. I'm in. |
| 221 | Robert L Mathews | We built a (software) RAID 5 array with as many disks as possible to "minimize the cost". That required a special server that supported more disks than our other servers, of course. Eventually, the inevitable happened: that server died, and we couldn't easily read the data because we didn't have an unused spare computer that could mount all those disks. With RAID 5, of course, you aren't going to read a single byte unless you can shove (almost) all of the disks into one computer. If we'd used RAID 1 and lived with the minor inconvenience of multiple partitions (which would work just fine in our case: the server is used for backups of thousands of Web sites, and each site can easily be automatically assigned to partitions with available space), we could have taken any one of the disks and plugged it into any computer and read the data back. Lesson learned; the shiny new replacement server will be using 10 disks as 5 RAID 1 partitions. If the entire server fails, we can easily get the data back by plugging single disks into another computer, and even if three disks failed simultaneously, we'd still only lose at most 20% of the data. Try *that* with RAID 5. |
| 222 | Ken Adamson | RAID 5 has been the bane of my existence, I want it to die. Stop the insanity! |
| 223 | Rich Jesse | Two words: HP Auto-(bleeping)-RAID |
| 224 | Flemming Danielsen | No RAID 5 |
| 225 | Ryan Bryers | I'm a TA, I've worked on the dark side and spec'd RAID 5............ I need to learn something useful now. |
| 226 | Justin Callison | I've finally found a place where I belong. I'm not alone. There is intelligent life out there. I love you guys .... |
| 227 | Muralee Anantharaman Easwaran | !!!! Trying to be equipped before I get into battle field |
| 228 | Didier Van Hoye | I've been slaying each and every RAID F setup I've come across in my career. Since there are more RAID F's than I can master I decided to get organized and join BAARF. |
| 229 | Brad Simmons | RAID-F on a SAN? Super-BAARF! Stop the in-SAN-ity! |
| 230 | Robin Harris | RAID 5 is a kludge. RAID 1+0 is the Rolls Royce of RAID. |
| 231 | Richard David | As an Ingres and Oracle DBA for more years than I care to count, I have grown to loathe the term 'RAID 5'. Urghhhh! |
| 232 | Pat Price | I too am tired of fighting vendors who influence storage "specialists" who influence DBAs that RAIDf is good for them. I decided to become a card carrying member of the BAARF party as soon as I found out it existed! |
| 233 | Johnny J. Andersen | No comment, just stay away from Raid F, Okay? |
| 234 | Gordon Miller | I can't have the bad write performance that RAID5 offers in a real-time recording environment. RAID5 should be outlawed under the Geneva Convention. |
| 235 | Simon Holt | Dear SAN admins: Repeatedly telling me that the cache solves all contention problems does not make the file wait events I always see disappear... |
| 236 | Þröstur Jónasson | Just lost an 6 drive RAID5 array. Do I need to say more? |
| 237 | Frederik Hertzum | After reading the "Why should I not use RAID 5?" article, it just doesn't make sense to even have the standard anymore. |
| 238 | Jinran Wang | I never thought RAID5 would impact the performance that much until we have a RAID5 drive. It is slow slow and slow. As an active Oracle database developer and administrator, I cannot take it any more! |
| 239 | Martin Farber | Awesome! I wish I had known about this site years ago! I've been fighting this battle since RAID went from Inexpensive disks to Expensive subsystems! 8^) Keep up the good work! Thanks! |
| 240 | Brad Havel | RAID-5 sucks. It just plain sucks. Overall it offers a false sense of performance at a lower cost. Well, you get what you pay for. |
| 241 | Erkki Vanninen | Just now fighting RAID-5 I/O performance problems on Oracle databases. |
| 242 | Michael Jacobsen | I heard this is the site for all answers concerning Oracle, so here I am. |
| 243 | Jose Figueroa B | Simply brilliant! I have spent long time having tried to convince specially to clients with Oracle technology that RAID-5 is the worse election, when have budget to RAID-10 With this page my work will be, much more easy much |
| 244 | Steven White | RDBMS and RAID 5! Need I say more |
| 245 | Philip Papadopoulos | SAME is the only way to go! |
| 246 | Joel Brunger | Fed up with dealing with poor performing databases due to poorly configured disk arrays. |
| 247 | Alan Campbell | I am on the BARFF team for life! |
| 248 | Venkat S. Devraj | Author of "Oracle 24x7" (Oracle Press) that includes an in-depth discussion on not using parity-based RAID levels for write-heavy applications, regardless of the size of the I/O sub-system cache! |
| 249 | tapio oikarinen | "stupid is as stupid do" |
| 250 | Bill Read | So I can impress my boss with all my RAID knowledge |
| 251 | Krister Evenmyr | I'm fed up with HW vendors stating that RAID 5 is now your best option when you want to optimise I/O performance. I'm also fed up with those who have bought it just because the vendor is a well known organisation! |
| 252 | Shannon Streifel | Back in the day, some idiot deployed an Oracle database (redo, data and control files) on a single RAID5 spindle violating Oracle's Golden Rule. Alas, they said they knew better. Until a bad sector in the active redo log file acted up. After I said 'I told you so' and recovered the database, it was redeployed on raid0+1 and raid1 spindles. Eternal frustration for those who use the 'f' word... |
| 253 | Ernesto Ghetti | it's a right battle |
| 254 | Florin Manaila | If one thing didn't work, I'd just try something else because I knew there was something that would work. There is always something that works. It's just a matter of finding out what. |
| FF | Bert Jan Meinders | Getting tired of the RAID-5 defenders.... when will they see the light.... |
| 256 | Guenther Stuerner | Enough is Enough. We are commited to customer success only and not to Raid-Levels which cause more problems. |
| 257 | Paul Janda | Two Words, first uttered in my "Office Space", in 1998: "Write Penalty" |
| 258 | Tom Thomson | I have loathed RAID 5 for about 18 years now, have taken my last two employers completely off it (to RAID 10) - why have I only discovered BARFF now? |
| 259 | Joe Moore | RAID 5 never really seemed quite right to me. My subconscious must have been telling me something. I didn't realize other's realized the same. |
| 260 | sridhar ramachandran | Good site with lot of info |
| 261 | Dave LaPoint | Don't BAARF and die the death of a thousand i/o's. Live Free of RAID5. |
| 262 | Pawel Potasinski | Great site! Great mission! Great jokes ;-) |
| 263 | abdul fubar | RAID5 databases are the single cause of global warming. |
| 264 | Alex Gorbachev | RAID-"F" bites sooner or later. It's just the matter of time. |
| 265 | Bret Dunbar | I was just reading "Battle Against Any Raid Five" by by Donald K. Burleson, and I saw the mention of your group. I can't tell you how happy I am to see that there are others out there who feel the same way about RAID 5 as I do. I am a Performance Tuning Specialist, and I have the same argument at almost every site. I used to work for the Oracle Corp. in their Core Technologies division, as a Senior Consultant back in the 90's. They taught us Best Practices, and that included staying away from RAID 5. I agree that Cary Milsap's White paper should have dismissed any further discussions on the subject, but I find that the majority of IT managers are not as tech savvy as they were in the 80's and 90's. Thanks for letting me vent my frustration! It's GREAT to be part of the team! |
| 267 | Bryan Jones | For the record, I hate RAID 5. |
| 268 | David Ballester Montolio | Select randomly a statement of previous members, will fit what I think |
| 269 | Vesa Pajuoja | Simply the best ! |
| 270 | Bryan Whitehead | Why do idiots spend so much money on licenses and fast servers and choke them with raid-5? I want to hit someone. |
| 271 | Andreas Chatziantoniou | Setting: A RA (RAID5 Anonymous) meeting
Enter: Andreas Andreas: "Hi I'm Andreas and I have a RAID5 problem." All: "Welcome Andreas." |
| 272 | Zbigniew Proch | 0+1, simply smart, never again RAID5 :-) |
| 273 | Robert Young | There are many things in Computerdom, which exist simply because a lot of simple minded people choose to believe It is So. XML databases is au courant. RAID/5 is an older version. Having a sufficiently trained scientific mind should be a requirement for doing databases; being able to separate the wheat from the chaff, as well. |
| 274 | Marcin Guzowski | RAID5 or performance. The choice is obvious. |
| 275 | Clinton Austin | RAID 5 Sucks - period...... |
| 276 | Remigiusz Boguszewicz | Well, I am on your side guys. |
| 277 | Lars W. Andersen | 10 is actually more than twice as good as 5 ... amazing!! |
| 278 | Nicolai Møller-Andersen | Farewell ode to raid 5: Everytime you go away - it is good for harddisk space - you really really make my day - and make the world a better place |
| 279 | Ejnar Svejstrup | Raid-f sucks. It is an often-used sales trick to recommend raid-f in order to reduce the initial price on SAN appliances. |
| 280 | Lars Fohn | The video speech in CRN TV was convincing. |
| 281 | Guy Harrison | I've been battling against RAID 5 since 1993. My 1997 SQL tuning book contained a section "Just say no to RAID 5" |
| 282 | Arnold Rimmer | I'm invoking Spacecorps regulation 234 stroke 62. |
| 283 | Floyd Absher | As a DBA with over 10 years of experience, I think this is fantastic! Can we really purge the world of IT of ignorance...maybe not, but I'm still going to get a BAARF shirt and flaunt it. |
| 284 | Bill Moran | Because RAID Free, Four, and Five suck |
| 285 | Robert Klemme | I've read Art's article quite a while ago and was immediately convinced. I swear, I've never set up a RAID-5 |
| 286 | Bernd Eckenfels | There are simply too many reasons to not trust RAID-F. Learned it in Theory and Practice. |
| 287 | Frank van Bortel | Who needs 5 in a binary world? |
| 288 | Erik Lundbye | Raid 5 is a low cost not a secure protection. |
| 289 | Erik Andreas Cayré | Nice learning from the masters;-) ..there will be no more RAIDF! |
| 300 | Alan Hovgaard "Happytiger" | Seeing is believing! But then how come so many ppl still believe in RAID5 seeing it fail all over. BAARF to the resque. So even the blind may see :-) . |
| 301 | Aleksei Sorokin | Make RAID10, not War! |
| 302 | Jaco Vosloo | It's wonderful to see others feel the same! Please add RAID 6 (Fsix?) to the list. |
| 303 | Henning Rindbæk | Never seen a database perform really good on raid f... To the beancounters: Remember that diskspace is cheap, time is not. |
| 304 | Glenn Tripp | Seems like a great idea! Why 14/2 shouldn't go down? |
| 305 | Terry Crosby | RAID - that means Rage Against Indifferent Democrats, right??? |
| 306 | Thomas Teske | Take an overall-system perspective AND measure system behaviour. Then you have all you need - no need for debates about specific features, functions or designs. Message : Hello BAARF, master - what about BAARF videos on YouTube in English? |
| 307 | Chris Yungfleisch | Did you hear the one about the two database blocks stuck on Raid 5 disks ... |
| 308 | Jon Adams | It never fails to amaze me why the decision makers would believe sales people over their own in-house experts. |
| 309 | Jurgen Plettinckx | It's hard to convince people that RAID 5 is not the right thing when looking for database performance ;-) |
| 310 | Jens-Harald Knudsen | After working more than 10 year's with Oracle, Sybase and MSSQL databases it's nice to know there still are people who looks at performance the same way I do.. Sadly my boss don't get it... |
| 311 | Adam Tauno Williams | Viva la BAARF! |
| 312 | Karol Korasadowicz | about time:-) |
| 313 | Myron Johnson | I'm an IT consultant and have seen WAY too much data lost on RAID 5 arrays. RAID 1 or 10 for me, thank you |
| 314 | Mischa E.J. Hoogendoorn | Finally! We are free again! |
| 315 | Jan Alfastsen | After several performance issues on several DAS/SAN's, I have now proved my point about why one should not implement RAID3/5 to my CIO. |
| 316 | Magnus Johansson | I have seen so many customers suffering from Raid5, sign me up please. |
| 317 | Ben Noblet | Just lost my second (and last ever) RAID5 array to a dodgy Adaptec controller. No more RAID5 for me! |
| 318 | Alexander 'sure' Podkopaev | I'm pretty tired of customer's cry "We have good server, do we?" in case of lot of CPU power, some RAM and 3-5 spindles in RAID5.... |
| 319 | Louis Avrami | Oh, these UNIX admins and their love for RAID 5! |
| 320 | Kim Pedersen | The concept of RAID5 always made me feel uneasy, and mirroring seemed the way. I've met a lot of skepticism over the years, but having found BAARF have given me the great satisfaction of knowing I was right - SO TAKE IT! |
| 321 | Selam Atevoli | Awesome page. Excellent info on why RAID10 is the way to go if you truly give a crap about DB performance. |
| 322 | Boris Stefanov | I've had enough of this *cheap* solution. Cheap to start with, very expensive on the long run. Kudos, BAARF |
| 323 | Yass Khogaly | Have had enough with RAID-5 over the past 22 years |
| 324 | Ricardo Napoli | RAID10 is twice as better than RAID5 (if not more)!!! Simple isn't it ? |
| 325 | Jeremy Cole | RAID 10 forever. |
| 326 | Anton Sekeris | As a developer I am resposible for delivering high-performance, robust, hihgh-availability solutions in the financial industry. I have written an extensive document outlining how to configure RAID to work best with our applications. And then financial institutions use ... RAID-5! And then I have customer cases showing RAID-5 is not good. And then they still use RAID-5! And then they come up with test suites behaving in no way like our applications that 'prove' that RAID-5 is as good as RAID-10. I've had it! Death to RAID-5! |
| 327 | keith little | Singing the BAARF song at KSC for many many years, and didn't even know I could join! Why do something good, when you can do something really, really stoopid with more hardware -- "...it's the way we've always done it... |
| 328 | Daniel V. Pedersen | Mmm .. Performance. |
| 329 | Daniel Morgan | To quote Edmund Burke: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." |
| 330 | Henrik Laursen | I just hate everything including RAID F |
| 331 | Thomas Richter | I BAARF |
| 332 | Glenn Fawcett | How many times must we fight this pointless battle? |
| 333 | Sulman Mansoor | I am deeply impressed by the dedication of this GROUP towards this "HOLY MISSION" , if I may call it. I am in the process of convincing my Technical Administration to GET RID of RAID 5 which will need alot of convincing with proofs. Hopefully this forum will help me get through |
| 334 | Mitchell Mysliwiec | I was duped into RAID-5, I'm writing this while waiting for a file to write |
| 335 | Chris Leslie | I have been tired of justifying my raid choices for years and am glad i found a place where people know the truth! |
| 336 | Per Kongstad | I have over the years been fighting and explaining why this type of Raid is bad. |
| 337 | Erik Bøg Jensen | BAARF |
| 338 | Neels Jordaan | Raid 3,4,5 is evil. |
| 339 | Kevin Little | Disks are cheap and manpower is expensive in relation. Why would anyone choose to save money on disks to introduce more human effort and chance for failure. Buy more disks, KISS, and LET ME SLEEP. |
| 340 | Marc Perkel | Interesting to find a group that came to the same conclusion I did. After experimenting it just seemed that Raid 10 because of simplicity and performance made more sense. I'm in the spam filtering business and Raid 5 seems almost as bad as the useless SPF crap we have to deal with. |
| 341 | Brent Wagner | I am joining BAARF because I am tired of impractical, ineffective, gee-whiz solutions to problems that don't exist. |
| 342 | Tommy Bollhofer | How many times must we fight this battle? |
| 343 | Daniel Caballero Rodríguez | RAID5 has a lot of possible usages... DB usage is not one of them. |
| 344 | Torolf Gulstuen | My hair gets up every time I hear RAID 5. As a database administrator, I have always banned it. |
| 345 | Torger Eidem | Preventing blaimstorming meetings. |
| 346 | Steve Cholerton | Having been led down the dark path that is Raid 5 d 5 in the past I have now seen the light. I am now fighting the good fight to rid the world of the evil that is Raid Free, Four or Five. |
| 347 | Alex Sons | Tremendous! As a Storage Architect having read the storageadvisor comments on RAID-5 reliability(*) and having encountered some real problems myself I can only agree with this initiative. (*): http://storageadvisors.adaptec.com/2007/07/10/effect-of-drive-count-on-raid-5/ |
| 348 | Margeret Mcclary | I AM TIRED OF ARGUING |
| 349 | Daniel Rey | RAID FIX is the new evil! |
| 350 | Jared Hecker | Give me a RAID-5 array and I will give you an I/O-bound database...and it's so much fun to shove it in the storage manager's face... |
| 351 | Guido van Verseveld | s!ck and tired of all those people that challenge that RAID-5 is not bad for DB environments. |
| 352 | Graeme Galt | 3 failures of raid 5 on servers specd by muppets, countless hour of pain, server performance of a dead dog on a broken skateboard and im fed to goddamn up... |
| 353 | Scott Rogers | RAID5 must die. |
| 354 | Ben Rogers | Because I can do basic arithmetic and basic arithmetic is not in RAID 5's favour. |
| 355 | Jesper Frimann | RAID5 is just another excuse to add complexity to save a few bucks on hardware. |
| 356 | Ricardo Portilho Proni | I won't comment anymore on RAID-F, not even for BAARF ! |
| 357 | Mark Inmon | To find about RAID. |
| 358 | Bryce Chidester | At first it was just being frugal with disks... then it was just being suicidal. |
| 359 | Ronald Asher Higgs | I am a testing technician for a company that sells iSCSI SANs and virtual tape systems, almost exclusively configured with RAID5 storage. I thought RAID 5 was the ideal until I came across a mention of your group. I came. I read. I BAARFed. |
| 360 | Martin Berger | Replace the 'enterprise san' with JABOD, invest the money in memory and a well tested ASM. |
| 361 | Matt DeMarco | I hate answering 'Why can't we use RAID 5...we have a lot of cache' |
| 362 | Jim Park | When you need HA, there's no good reason to take a bat to I/O. |
| 363 | Craig Thomas | I'm all for anything involving beer and arguments with systems administrators. |
| 364 | Lis Chaseling | Rumour has it that my IDS LUNs are about to magically morph from RAID10 into RAID5 - I think it must be beer o'clock *sigh* |
| 365 | Graham Kettlewell | A catastrophic hardware raid on our main server that lost all the data on it. I made the mistake of thinking raid was a backup, not just a duty cycle tool. Never again! |
| 366 | Russ Pearson | RAID5 kills kittens! Stop it! Just say no to RAID5 for database implementations. |
| 367 | Daniel Hoffman | My reason is clear, i was once lost in the Myst of lies about raid 5. how it was our only hope.. but i was lead astray by the false teachings. I have found the true like of Raid .. in 10 |
| 368 | Dinesh Choudhary | In my career as a DBA I always have resisted against any quick solution without first understanding the problem. I found this forum rational and working towards busting the myth.It looks like that I found a forum to which I am compatible to. |
| 369 | Mark Cohen | RAID-5 (3/4) is just plain stupid. |
| 370 | Kenneth Naim | Tried of explaining that raid 5 won't perform, and will cost more money in the long run. And using it to test performance when production is raid 0+1 is worthless |
| 371 | Evert Meulie | You make a good case, and I see no reason to disagree ;-) |
| 372 | Don Bauer | Makes sense to me. Always wanted mirroring on my development system. Why play games? |
| 373 | Terris Linenbach | You're right. I will never talk about RAID5 again! |
| 374 | Henrik Harsfort | Still too many RAID5 based OLTP-systems around |
| 375 | Hari Kaimal | I've been administering Oracle databases (from 7.3.4 to 10gR2)on diverse platforms (AIX, Solaris, HP-UX, Win 2K, Win 2003, RHEL, RH9...) all of which have the worst thing in common: RAID-5. 'Nuff said. |
| 376 | Peter Haynes | RAID 5 is a slow antiquated technology. Nobody uses DOS systems anymore, they should not use RAID 5 either. |
| 377 | Vasanth Kumar D | Reason for me being here is to know more about RAID |
| 378 | Sam Yaple | Do people even know what they're getting into with RAID-F?!? I Couldn't sleep if I had data on a Five, Four, or Free. |
| 379 | Karl Fife | Thanks, I needed that. Laughed out loud. Personally I don't like raid10 either, so maybe there should be a new club (or chapter) called BAARFT, (...Against Raid Five and Ten). I prefer straight mirrors or unstriped spans--slower but safer. Drives are usually fast and large enough now to forego the added risk of volume loss due to losing the 2 drives in the stripe. Remember, two DISMOUNTs (not just catestrophic mechanical failures) can cause total volume loss. On more than one occasion we've seen quirky drive/controller firmware interplay cause dismount during high I/O. This can mean losing the entire volume on rebuild, or when committing lots of transactions that are least likely to be backed up yet. I've also seen $h177y power and data cables cause dismounts resulting in dismout. That's Bad. Nothing insurmountable here, but still, it tips the risk reward analysis. |
| 380 | Julio Cesar Correa | No more RAID F* |
| 381 | Charles Bird | BAARF, RAID5 makes me sick |
| 382 | Noel Koutlis | Regards from Athens, Greece |
| 383 | John Nardello | I've lost multiple RAID-5 filesystems because of dual-disk failure during the rebuild stage. And management keeps buying them. Time to BAARF ! |
| 384 | Marcel Verdaasdon | Nowadays we have false RAID controllers on Desktop systems. They are fun to play around with... Untill the OS crashes and you need to reinstall it totaly. Seems software RAID gives better perfomance still then a false controller. (Lucky me i used 1+0 in a software config) |
| 385 | Brian Modra | I once blindly followed "expert" advise to use RAID 5. Later I learned. But recently have been mis-advised again, by a major Telecom's data center administrator, that RAID 5 is the way to go. To convince him, from my humble perspective, I had to show him BAARF. |
| 386 | James Allmond | Raid-F is evil. DBA in 5 DB engines over the years, all perform poorly on Raid-F. Remember the old days, Raid 4 for this, 5 for this, 3 (God help us) for that...ugh, all it took was one person to add a file in the wrong place... RAID-F must die. RAID 1+0 is the way to go if you just have to use RAID... Anyhow disk really is inexpensive now.. |
| 387 | Brent Watkins | Yo momma haz a RAID 5. |
| 388 | Victor Pina Coutinho de Jesus | I read your explanation about raid5 and I completely agree about it. Nowadays it's no longer a choice. |
| 389 | Glenn Kelley | Last night Raid 10 saved my life and Raid 5 gave me a broken heart ... love thunderstorms |
| 390 | Tristan Harmer | BEFORE 3 disk R5 array. Database and web server performance graphs look like jagged, horrible mountains. AFTER 6 disk R10. Graphs transformed to beautiful rolling fields. Bluebirds chirp, butterflies flutter and life is good. R5? NEVER AGAIN!! |
| 391 | Waldemar Talen | With high-performance terabyte drive prices affordable to the average family budget there is no excuse for sacrificing performance to "save space". New technology is expensive to implement - RAID devices, i.e., SAN, NAS, etc. are not new and not expensive anymore - tuning around RAID 5 is expensive. |
| 392 | Doug Hanna | I've inhereted a data center built by developers. Every system's OS runs on a RAID 5. I have a lot of work to do. |
| 393 | Geoff Strickler | I've spent far too much time arguing against RAID5 and for RAID10 (RAID1 or RAID0 for specific situations). I'm sick of arguing with idiots, and I'm thankful to have found BAARF. |
| 394 | Marcus Mönnig | I've been there. I saw multiple hardware and software RAID-5 layers stacked up to hold database files. It turned out that "the application is slow". |
| 395 | Romain B | Unable to rebuild md0 ? WTF ??? |
| 396 | Naveen samala | The title 'Enough is Enough' |
| 397 | Marcin Przepiorowski | Together we can fight better with RAID-5 and big disks for DB. It drive me crazy every time I hear that SAN performance is almost infinity and every SAN can held every workload |
| 398 | Polleke | Because i had a Linux software raid5 system crash on me... |
| 399 | Scott Alan Miller | Beyond performance problems, RAID-F also suffers from an additional level of failure not present in non-RAID-F (NRF) RAID systems like R1 and R10, parity failure. When a Raid-F (RF) array has detected a drive failure and begins rebuilding it is in a state of instability and an error on the controller can cause a complete array loss even in situations involving no drive failure and only involving momentary loss of contact with a drive. I have seen first hand entire RAID-5 arrays lost without the failure of a single drive and know other people who have gone through this as well.
Drives are cheap. It is time to move on to RAID 10!! |
| 400 | Jerry Locke | I have been bitten by RAID-5 failures and performance issues enough times to know better. Never again! Hardware is too cheap, vs. my time and frustration, for anything less than a mirror. |
| 401 | Pablo Mazzei | RAID5 is Bad. RAID5 on your logfiles is worse. RAID5 shared between many DB's logfiles is a living hell.... But the SAN has cache! They say. BAARF FTW! |
| 402 | Chip Purcell | I'm about to walk into a Raid-5 environment. Your positive thoughts are appreciated. RETCH (Raid5 Erradication Team Curing Headaches) BAARF and RETCH? |
| 403 | Robert Purdy | Hardly anyone realises the weakness of RAID 5 - they just see the potential performance hit and think I can live with that. |
| 404 | Vic Genna | Weed out the noise, and get an education. |
| 405 | Jason Doller | R-F is no longer practically viable. |
| 406 | Kirk Brocas | I have a deep aversion to RAID 5, both because it does not perform well in a database environment, and because it doesn't provide high enough redundancy. It's a favourite of penny-pinching IT management and network administrators used to file and print servers. Unfortunately DBAs are often the last people consulted when purchasing IT infrastructure hardware. As ASM grabs hold, the the roles of SAN administrator and DBA will collide, and this is the first front. |
| 407 | Allen Herndon | SA's are driving me crazy telling me raid 5 is cool now. |
| 408 | Nayan Mamania | To Share knwledge on RAID |
| 409 | Dan Joseph | Woof! |
| 410 | Al Kal | Two logical write failure on RAID 5 on 2 drives at the same time caused full failure of Array...what is the point? |
| 411 | Ansley Barnes | RAID 5 is an obsolete tech that's getting more dangerous with age. Time to put it out to pasture! |
| 412 | Steven Vickruck | Here's hoping I never have to hear about RAID-F ever again. |
| 413 | Jake Vinson | I lost a RAID 5 array and it cost over $13k to recover. I use only RAID 1 for personal data; RAID 5 in this office was a mistake. RAID 1 all the way unless you need 10 or 60 6 etc |
| 414 | James Penney | We do not support RAID-5; nor Malware for that matter... |
| 415 | Paul van Velzen | I have seen the light. No more discussions with the storage guys. |
| 416 | Steven Moyse | I was looking for information on RAID6 when I came across this page. I have been fighting the good fight for many years now, but am losing the battle. My customers machines are being replaced by VMs with SAN Storage. A vendor who supplied a RAID6 SAN system to one of my customers, he said that there was little performance impact when using RAID6. I don't believe him, RAID6 sounds like RAID5 in sheep's clothing. |
| 417 | Matthias Bertschy | Almost lost 8T of data on a RAID5 |
| 418 | Diego Dutra Sanches | I'm tired of bad database implementations, where the manager always ask to use RAID 5 to make solution cheaper |
| 419 | Gregory Keith Brown | Everything is a Transaction! |
| 420 | Alex Reynolds | Drives are too cheap to risk your data on RAID 5. |
| 421 | Óðinn Burkni Helgason | err... still using one RAID5 but that was from before... will change that asap... |
| 422 | Dan Farrell | Poor performance, poor reliability, why use RAID 5? Hard drives are cheap, RAID 10 rules! |
| 423 | Pedro Quintas | Dont join in the dark side! Go BAARF! |
| 424 | Michael M. Hansen | RAID 5 is BAD and EVIL! The main mail server at $WORK was down for 3 days because of a controller failure. The admin responsible had already been fired for incompetence, so we had no one to yell at. We could only blame ourselves for not converting the array to RAID 1 at the earliest opportunity. |
| 425 | Kenneth Witzell | The only thing worse than having your data and index files on RAID-5 is having them both on the same RAID-5 spindles! |
| 426 | Brian Kelly | Just give me RAID 1+0, okay? |
| 427 | Duke van Leeuwen | We all used raid 5.... Niels Bohr: An expert is someone who has made all the mistakes that can be made, but in a very narrow field |
| 428 | Evgenij Smirnov | I earn my living by doing things that make sense. RAID-F doesnt't make any. Period. |
| 429 | Tom Bascom | I've had enough! |
| 430 | Guzman Braso | Great idea |
| 431 | Reid McKinley | I see trees of green, RAID10 too... I see it bloom for me and you... and I think to myself, what a wonderful world |
| 432 | Thomas Vagner | raid 0+1 always did the job on my prods, never envountered problems. But i always see problems in raid5 confs in dev envs... tsk tsk |
| 433 | Svend Jensen | Raid F optimizes space, something any accountant can relate to. Start talking about iops, you hit the wall of non understanding - and it is more expensive too.. |
| 434 | Franck Hamon | I can't support the performance of RAID5 and hate marketing of it ! |
| 435 | Brian Weiss | I have been sending our clients links to your site. They seem to just "love" the idea of RAID 5 - personally I can't stand it. Burned 3 times in the past 5 years by RAID 5. We do only mirroring with an imaging backup system (Acronis). |
| 436 | Hans Molin | SQL Server on RAID 5 sucks ass, no matter what I do. |
| 437 | Markus B | Hate the RAID5... |
| 438 | Vikram Thakur | Better late than never |
| 439 | David Craven | I've had enough. More than enough. Sadly, vendors will continue to sell this junk as long as they can find gullible, uninformed fools. |
| 440 | Ronald L Copeland Sr. | Will to know the truth... |
| 441 | Abraham Gilles de Jager | No one in the managament believes RAID 5 is really poor in performance. |
| 442 | Paul Seeber | Hi, finally I found you, brothers in spirit! |
| 443 | Thomas Wach | Be consequent! RAID1 or RAID10, no reason for RAID3/4/5 anymore! |
| 444 | Dave Walker | If you don't trust one drive, why would you trust three or four? |
| 445 | Parvez M Makhani | Thanks for expanding our knowledge |
| 446 | Bastian Feldmann | Just had a server here with 3 slow disk in a RAID 5 array ... performed as expected: reading performance was 60% and writing performance 3% of a standard DELL server with 8 disks in a Raid 1+0 and 4 years old |
| 447 | Hendrik Visage | RAID-Z makes much more sense when you have bit rot!! |
| 448 | Chad Hembree | Hello, my name is Chad and I am a recovering RAID 5 user. I openly admit the error of my ways and wish to be redeemed in the eyes of my fellow IT Managers and the DB Administrators we serve. I vow to to pickup the challenge and take on the fight against RAID F***. |
| 449 | Keith Palmer | Thank you HP for yet another failed RAID-5 array. Death to RAID-F! |
| 450 | Geoffrey Cline | Almost used Raid 5, thanks !! |
| 451 | Ivan Bajon | I need a rifle, rations, and directions to the battlefield. |
| 452 | Raphael Busschau | RAID-F. You know F can stand for a lot more than Five, Four or Free. |
| 453 | Ali Fakoor | Well got fed up with this [R]edundancy [A]ided [I]mplementation [D]isaster - [5] Take five |
| 454 | Gustavo Machado Gurgel | Oracle DBA |
| 455 | Michael Webb | Spindles are forever hidden from view. With all the cache and crappy code who needs redundant data spread out in pieces. |
| 456 | Rich Allen | Tired of all the vendor misinformation. |
| 457 | Brian Bowman | Constantly battling (still) database performance disk bottlenecks with RAID5. |
| 458 | Simon L. Prinsloo | If commonsense was as common as the name implies and if disk space was cheap, everybody would use RAID10. Oh, wait, disk space IS cheap but most of "them" always want RAID5? That implies.... |
| 459 | Julian Macassey | Nice to know that my contempt for RAID 5 is shared. It's been lonely out there. |
| 460 | Januaca Tjandra | Over 15 years I have been using RAID 5, experience many pains of data loss even during a time when scsi drive are the cost of 2 computers today and we build them in with two hot swap drive on stand by. I gave up on RAID 5 the moment hard drive reach 750GB at rubbish prices. RAID 10 is my preferred choice. |
| 461 | Alexios Koumouris | Working for a company that has over 1000 oracle and sql installations on Greek Government. Before 8 years, most of our clients used raid-5. Now, most of them use Raid10 or raid 1. |
| 462 | Jan Schermer | I hate RAID5 wholeheartedly - people think it's "safe" to use with "good" performance - the exact opposite is true. |
| 463 | Stork Hsu | I'd like to learn from others experiences in planning SAN for Oracle environments. |
| 464 | Alexandru Dan | I am so TIRED of people arguing about RAID-F and why is better or why would they choose it. I would never choose it and never done it. I've done RAID-1, RAID-0 and RAID-10 but never any RAID-F's. |
| 465 | David Bridges | I've seen the performance impact of Raid5 rebuilds after drive failures. Also, the issue of building drive arrays from a single prod run of drives of the same age (multi drive failures) |
| 466 | Luis Bognot | gOOD INFORMATION |
| 467 | Gary J. Hayers | RAID-5 seemed like a good idea at the time... |
| 468 | Antony Ruddy | I totally concur with BAARF's philosophy. |
| 469 | Frank Rotchford | In 1992 I refuted the RAID-5 claims, but no one would listen. This 40 year DBA now feels vindicated. |
| 470 | Art Taylor | RAID-F creates a false sense of security. It's faster to restore from backup than it is to rebuild an array. If we just admit that, then mirroring = faster MTTR. Spindles and chips are less expensive than effectively being out of business for days. |
| 471 | David Bethany | Stop the insanity! |
| 472 | Alexander Brückel | No more praying in front of the storage rack! No more raid5! |
| 473 | Dirk Anteunis | Trying to engineer highly available systems, I started looking into failure probabilities and (financial) consequences. RAID5 is a nice academic concept, useful for learning but not appropriate for engineering. |
| 474 | Jorgen Mourton | RAID 5 + Large disks = failed rebuilds, lost data |
| 475 | Moustafa Ahmed | RIAD F is a disaster and many SA and SAN admin's are ignoring this fact like all systems are using virtual tier like SVC.. make sure to check how you are connecting to your end IO subsystem and discuss that! |
| 476 | Claus M. Koch | I have no more patience for the same old discussions over and over again, so I join a that is it. |
| 477 | Mikael Hansson | I've seen enough RAID5 to last me a lifetime. |
| 478 | Mark Holden | Fighting ignorance and RAID vendors for 20 years. Basic Rule of RAID: You have have a choice of Cheap, Fast, Reliable. You can pick 2. |
| 479 | Wynand CJ Hart | Technology should improve, we have left the bronze age behind. |
| 480 | Marcio Silva | Still want to suffer? then test test test and reach the conclusion that we already have a long time in the RAID-F |
| 481 | Alex Rauschenbach | What is point of stringing drives together if you don't get improvements across all levels of performance? Backups suffice for redundancy where needed, RAID 1+0 OR BUST! |
| 482 | Murray Sobol | We need more advocates of BAARF. |
| 483 | Antonio Oliveira | Raid 5 sucks. |
| 484 | Etienne Adam | Rage against all the RAID5 out there |
| 485 | Jérôme Villeneuve | I've lost enough money and data on RAID 5 - enough is enough! |
| 486 | Greg Clough | FINALLY! Something I can really get behind. I feel proud to join the ranks to fight the BAARF! |
| 487 | Malte Geierhos | Been there, done that. Lost Money, Data, Performance. Enough is Enough. No more Raid5, 6 DP |
| 488 | Ron Ekins | RAID-5 give storage admins a free lunch at the expense of DBAs |
| 489 | M. Simard | You've got a new disciple. I will spread out this Holy Information to clients, managers and tekkies. With 25 years of experience as a king to find performance solutions as a sysadmin/dba/network admin/developer/architect, I will have only one word to say to dummy storage admins or sysadmin and their managers : baarf |
| 490 | Todd Gehrke | I baarf in the general direction of RAID-5. |
| 491 | Chris Ciolli | RAID F… Brittle Absolute Atrocious Royal Fail |
| 492 | Jason Wynsen | It's 2018... Enough is enough. |
| 493 | Vesa Kivistö | Everyone say's it is wrong, but I know it is right. I can feel it in my blood, you are the one for me, my little RAID 10 |
| 494 | Arne Kaulfuß | Over 20 years of experience with storage and all bad things around.
Shared this page so many times in the last years but it seems that i never joined the party - done! |
| 495 | Pedro Martins | RAID 5 is the reason why decision makers should never accept a contract without consulting a member of the team that will work if the solution, preferably a BAARF member. |
| 496 | Alex Powell | es, RAID6 and subsequent parity RAID levels are included in this |
| 99999 | Keith Moore | Current employer uses RAID 5 SAN. Purchased a new "faster" SAN. With minimal load, read performance increased 4X. Write performance exactly the same. Hmmmmmmmmmmm! |