Which is better: RAID 10 (1+0) or RAID 01 (0+1)? 
I'm asking because I have two 10k 16mb VelociRaptor HDDs and obviously I want to use their speeds for performance, but I also have two 500GB 7200rpm 16mb HDDs that I want to use for storage.
By putting the two 10k RPM HDDs into RAID 0, for performance, and utilizing the higher capacity HDDs for storage for RAID 1, isn't RAID 01 (0+1) the best option out of the two?
Both descriptions are relatively the same for me. I understand that if one of the higher capacity drives goes, there will still be one working so no data is lost, which is what I'm aiming for...but what would happen if one of the 10k rpm HDDs goes? Does the whole system crash or something? What are the functions of the 10krpm HDDs in both set-ups?
Please explain.
I've been using RAID 0+1 (01) as my primary RAID configuration, however, I've always read good things about RAID 10. Or is what I am trying to accomplish above really RAID 10?
I'm asking because I have two 10k 16mb VelociRaptor HDDs and obviously I want to use their speeds for performance, but I also have two 500GB 7200rpm 16mb HDDs that I want to use for storage.
By putting the two 10k RPM HDDs into RAID 0, for performance, and utilizing the higher capacity HDDs for storage for RAID 1, isn't RAID 01 (0+1) the best option out of the two?
Both descriptions are relatively the same for me. I understand that if one of the higher capacity drives goes, there will still be one working so no data is lost, which is what I'm aiming for...but what would happen if one of the 10k rpm HDDs goes? Does the whole system crash or something? What are the functions of the 10krpm HDDs in both set-ups?
Please explain.
I've been using RAID 0+1 (01) as my primary RAID configuration, however, I've always read good things about RAID 10. Or is what I am trying to accomplish above really RAID 10?