RAID 1 and Spare


Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Which one?  (Read 1651 times)


  • Guest
Which one?
« on: January 24, 2013, 12:25:47 AM »

Hello! Following advice from Digital Dog, I have now a Sonnet 4 drive Fusion, with 1 TB each.
Configuring it in Disk Utility, on Mac, it proposes me to Spare or to Slice.
Which is the best option ?


  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 886
    • Images by Murray
Re: Which one?
« Reply #1 on: January 24, 2013, 03:52:01 PM »

RAID 1 will utilize 2 Drives, the spare will utilize 1 - leaving a drive unused.  Your total capacity will be 1TB.

An alternate would be RAID1+0 (RAID10) which would consist of 2 RAID 1 pairs stacked in a RAID 0 set.  This would give you a total capacity of 2TB, but no spare.  If you are willing to purchase an additional drive to have on hand, this will give you great performance with a fast rebuild time should an individual drive fail

Another alternative would be RAID5, utilizing 3 Drives, giving a capacity of ~1.86 TB with a spare.  The downside to RAID5 is that data is striped across the 3 drives with parity - this parity calculation involves overhead at the controller and will greatly slow down a rebuild should an individual drive fail


  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 156
Re: Which one?
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2013, 10:19:30 AM »

I use RAID 5, as it offers the best comprimise between speed and redundancy. Nearly as fast as RAID 0, and no data loss when a drive dies. However, the rebuild does take a little while, and it's a good idea to have a spare (fifth) drive on hand as (at least for my OWC QX2) the enclosure works best when it has all the same make, model, and firmware drive.


  • Guest
Re: Which one?
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2013, 08:00:23 PM »

RAID 1 and RAID 5 (spare) will both give you data redundancy in the case of a drive failure. But RAID 1 will be faster, while RAID 5 will be larger (3TB vs. 2TB) and somewhat slower.
Pages: [1]   Go Up