Miguel Medalha wrote: > >> have raid 0 and raid1 on the same drive isn't going to gie you anything >> since the raid 1 will "slow" the other raids down. >> > > You are assuming that both arrays will always be concurrently accessed > but that may not be the case. > More yet: the configuration may have been studied in such a way that > concurrent access is rarely the case. just partitioning your disks will incur a performance penalty up to 30%.