RAID (redundant array of

independent disks)
How RAID works

RAID works by placing data on multiple disks and allowing input/output (I/O)
operations to overlap in a balanced way, improving performance. Because the
use of multiple disks increases the mean time between failures (MTBF), storing
data redundantly also increases fault tolerance.

RAID arrays appear to the operating system (OS) as a single logical hard disk.
RAID employs the techniques of disk mirroring or disk striping. Mirroring copies
identical data onto more than one drive. Striping partitions each drive's storage
space into units ranging from a sector (512 bytes) up to several megabytes. The
stripes of all the disks are interleaved and addressed in order.

In a single-user system where large records, such as medical or other scientific images,
are stored, the stripes are typically set up to be small (perhaps 512 bytes) so that a single
record spans all the disks and can be accessed quickly by reading all the disks at the same
time.

In a multiuser system, better performance requires that you establish a stripe wide enough
to hold the typical or maximum size record. This allows overlapped disk I/O across
drives.

Disk mirroring and disk striping can be combined on a RAID array. Mirroring and
striping are used together in RAID 01 and RAID 10.
RAID controller

A RAID controller can be used as a level of abstraction between the OS and the physical
disks, presenting groups of disks as logical units. Using a RAID controller can improve
performance and help protect data in case of a crash.

A RAID controller can be used in both hardware- and software-based RAID arrays. In
a hardware-based RAID product, a physical controller manages the array. When in the
form of a Peripheral Component Interconnect or PCI Express card, the controller can be
designed to support drive formats such as SATA and SCSI. A physical RAID controller
can also be part of the motherboard.

With software-based RAID, the controller uses the resources of the hardware system.
While it performs the same functions as a hardware-based RAID controller, software-
based RAID controllers may not enable as much of a performance boost.

If a software-based RAID implementation isn't compatible with a system's boot-up

process, and hardware-based RAID controllers are too costly, firmware- or driver-based,
RAID is another implementation option.

A firmware-based RAID controller chip is located on the motherboard, and all operations
are performed by the CPU, similar to software-based RAID. However, with firmware, the
RAID system is only implemented at the beginning of the boot process. Once the OS has
loaded, the controller driver takes over RAID functionality. A firmware RAID controller
isn't as pricy as a hardware option, but puts more strain on the computer's CPU.
Firmware-based RAID is also called hardware-assisted software RAID, hybrid model
RAID and fake RAID.

RAID levels

In the 1988 paper that coined the term and cemented the concept, the authors
distinguished six levels of RAID, 0 through 5. This numbered system allowed them to
differentiate the versions and how they used redundancy and spread data across the array.
The number of levels has since expanded and has been broken into three categories:
standard, nested and nonstandard RAID levels.

Standard RAID levels

RAID 0: This configuration has striping, but no redundancy of data. It offers the best
performance, but no fault tolerance.

RAID 1: Also known as disk mirroring, this configuration consists of at least two drives
that duplicate the storage of data. There is no striping. Read performance is improved
since either disk can be read at the same time. Write performance is the same as for single
disk storage.
RAID 2: This configuration uses striping across disks, with some disks storing error
checking and correcting (ECC) information. It has no advantage over RAID 3 and is no
longer used.

RAID 3: This technique uses striping and dedicates one drive to

storing parity information. The embedded ECC information is used to detect errors. Data
recovery is accomplished by calculating the exclusive OR (XOR) of the information
recorded on the other drives. Since an I/O operation addresses all the drives at the same
time, RAID 3 cannot overlap I/O. For this reason, RAID 3 is best for single-user systems
with long record applications.

RAID 4: This level uses large stripes, which means you can read records from any single
drive. This allows you to use overlapped I/O for read operations. Since all write
operations have to update the parity drive, no I/O overlapping is possible. RAID 4 offers
no advantage over RAID 5.
RAID 5: This level is based on block-level striping with parity. The parity information is
striped across each drive, allowing the array to function even if one drive were to fail.
The array's architecture allows read and write operations to span multiple drives. This
results in performance that is usually better than that of a single drive, but not as high as
that of a RAID 0 array. RAID 5 requires at least three disks, but it is often recommended
to use at least five disks for performance reasons.

RAID 5 arrays are generally considered to be a poor choice for use on write-intensive
systems because of the performance impact associated with writing parity information.
When a disk does fail, it can take a long time to rebuild a RAID 5 array. Performance is
usually degraded during the rebuild time, and the array is vulnerable to an additional disk
failure until the rebuild is complete.

RAID 6: This technique is similar to RAID 5, but includes a second parity scheme that is
distributed across the drives in the array. The use of additional parity allows the array to
continue to function even if two disks fail simultaneously. However, this extra protection
comes at a cost. RAID 6 arrays have a higher cost per gigabyte (GB) and often have
slower write performance than RAID 5 arrays.
Nested RAID levels

Some RAID levels are referred to as nested RAID because they are based on a
combination of RAID levels. Here are some examples of nested RAID levels.

RAID 10 (RAID 1+0): Combining RAID 1 and RAID 0, this level is often referred to as
RAID 10, which offers higher performance than RAID 1, but at a much higher cost. In
RAID 1+0, the data is mirrored and the mirrors are striped.
RAID 01 (RAID 0+1): RAID 0+1 is similar to RAID 1+0, except the data organization
method is slightly different. Rather than creating a mirror and then striping the mirror,
RAID 0+1 creates a stripe set and then mirrors the stripe set.

RAID 03 (RAID 0+3, also known as RAID 53 or RAID 5+3): This level uses striping
(in RAID 0 style) for RAID 3's virtual disk blocks. This offers higher performance than
RAID 3, but at a much higher cost.

RAID 50 (RAID 5+0): This configuration combines RAID 5 distributed parity with
RAID 0 striping to improve RAID 5 performance without reducing data protection.

Nonstandard RAID levels

RAID 7: This RAID level is based on RAID 3 and RAID 4, but adds caching to the mix.
It includes a real-time embedded OS as a controller, caching via a high-speed bus and
other characteristics of a stand-alone computer. It is a nonstandard, trademarked RAID
level owned by the now defunct Storage Computer Corp.
Adaptive RAID: Adaptive RAID lets the RAID controller decide how to store the parity
on the disks. It will choose between RAID 3 and RAID 5, depending on which RAID set
type will perform better with the type of data being written to the disks.

RAID S (also known as parity RAID): This is an alternate, proprietary method for
striped parity RAID from EMC Symmetrix that is no longer in use on current equipment.
It appears to be similar to RAID 5 with some performance enhancements, as well as the
enhancements that come from having a high-speed disk cache on the disk array.

Linux MD RAID 10: This level, provided by the Linux kernel, supports the creation of
nested and nonstandard RAID arrays. Linux software RAID can also support the creation
of standard RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 4, RAID 5 and RAID 6 configurations.

Benefits of RAID

Performance, resiliency and cost are among the major benefits of RAID. By putting
multiple hard drives together, RAID can improve on the work of a single hard drive and,
depending on how it is configured, can increase computer speed and reliability after a
crash.

With RAID 0, files are split up and distributed across drives that work together on the
same file. As such, reads and writes can be performed faster than with a single drive.
RAID 5 arrays break data into sections, but also devote another drive to parity. This
parity drive can see what is working when one nonparity drive fails, and can figure out
what was on that failed drive. This function allows RAID to provide
increased availability. With mirroring, RAID arrays can have two drives containing the
same data, ensuring one will continue to work if the other fails.

Although the term inexpensive was removed from the acronym, RAID can still result in
lower costs by using lower-priced disks in large numbers.
Downsides of using RAID

Nested RAID levels are more expensive to implement than traditional RAID levels
because they require a greater number of disks. The cost per GB of storage is also higher
for nested RAID because so many of the drives are used for redundancy. Nested RAID
has become popular in spite of its cost because it helps to overcome some of the
reliability problems associated with standard RAID levels.

Initially, all the drives in a RAID array are installed at the same time. This makes the
drives the same age and subject to the same operating conditions and amount of wear.
But when a drive fails, there is a high probability that another drive in the array will also
soon fail.

Some RAID levels (such as RAID 5 and RAID 1) can only sustain a single drive failure,
although some RAID 1 implementations consist of multiple mirrors, and can therefore
sustain multiple failures. The problem is that the RAID array and the data it contains are
left in a vulnerable state until a failed drive is replaced and the new disk is populated with
data. Because drives have much greater capacity now than when RAID was first
implemented, it takes a lot longer to rebuild failed drives. Longer rebuild times increase
the chance that a second drive will fail before the first drive is rebuilt.

Even if a second disk failure does not occur while the failed disk is being replaced, there
is a chance the remaining disks may contain bad sectors or unreadable data. These types
of conditions may make it impossible to fully rebuild the array.

Nested RAID levels address these problems by providing a greater degree of redundancy,
greatly decreasing the chances of an array-level failure due to simultaneous disk failures.

The future of RAID

RAID is not quite dead, but many analysts say the technology has become
obsolete in recent years. Alternatives such as erasure coding offer better data
 protection (albeit at a higher price), and have been developed with the intention
of addressing the weaknesses of RAID. As drive capacity increases, so does the
chance for error with a RAID array, and capacities are consistently increasing.

Prev

1. 1

Next

Margaret Rouse asks:

What RAID level(s) do you use in your

organization?
Join the Discussion

Prev

1. 1

Next

Margaret Rouse asks:

What RAID level(s) do you use in your

organization?
Join the Discussion

o 1
o 2