Nikolay Ulyanitsky wrote: >> I can not comment on "most vendors" but for the PROGRESS RDBMS RAID5 >> is definitely not recommended. It will work but you will see a >> significant reduction in performance. We strongly recommend that our >> clients go with RAID10 (as in RAID 1+0). In-house we only use RAID10. > > +1 > Write performance of RAID5 on hardware MegaRAID SATA 150-6D is *very* > poor. > > So? That thing is 1) ancient with what looks like a half-baked chip solution for raid5 calculations and 2) just comes with only 64MB of cache. You can get a 3ware card with much more cache (9550 and above) and blow away that LSI piece of rubbish.