I believe I know part of the answer, but kind of curious what the storage experts say. Two brands I have worked with, NetApp and EqualLogic (24+ disks) both use RAID Groups. Therefore the usable capacity is much lower since especially with dual parity. But it makes sense that it would be better protected but less performance compared to a single large raid group.
Then I look at Nimble which has triple parity, and one large RAID group. I don't know the number off the top of my head, but I believe depending on the system you can have up to 80 disks and it would be just one large RAID group. On top of which they are all SATA disks which most other storage vendors use smaller raid groups when compared to SAS.
So why is this? Is Nimble simply gambling on additional performance and usable storage verse overall data protection, or should storage not be broken up into several raid groups?
Then I look at Nimble which has triple parity, and one large RAID group. I don't know the number off the top of my head, but I believe depending on the system you can have up to 80 disks and it would be just one large RAID group. On top of which they are all SATA disks which most other storage vendors use smaller raid groups when compared to SAS.
So why is this? Is Nimble simply gambling on additional performance and usable storage verse overall data protection, or should storage not be broken up into several raid groups?