Drag and Drop Question Match the RAID level with its capacity overhead. (Each option may be used once, more than once, or not at all.) Answer:

Question

Exhibit

Answer Area

Explanation

RAID Capacity Overhead - Explanation

The question is missing the left-column labels (the RAID levels), but the correct arrangement maps as follows based on standard RAID behavior:

Position-by-Position Breakdown

1. RAID 1 → Capacity of one drive RAID 1 mirrors data across exactly 2 drives. Every byte is written twice, so 50% of total storage is overhead - equivalent to one full drive. In a 2×1TB array, you get 1TB usable.

2. RAID 0 → Zero overhead RAID 0 stripes data across drives with no redundancy whatsoever. Every drive contributes 100% of its capacity to the usable pool. There is no parity, no mirroring - zero overhead. The tradeoff is that one failed drive loses all data.

3. RAID 5 → Capacity of one drive RAID 5 distributes parity across all drives. The total parity data equals exactly one drive's worth of capacity, regardless of how many drives are in the array. In a 4×1TB array, you get 3TB usable.

4. RAID 6 → Capacity of two drives RAID 6 uses dual distributed parity, allowing two simultaneous drive failures. This costs two full drives' worth of capacity. In a 4×1TB array, you get 2TB usable.

Common Misconceptions

• RAID 1 vs RAID 5 confusion: Both "cost" one drive's worth of capacity, but for different reasons - RAID 1 duplicates everything, RAID 5 stores calculated parity. Students often think RAID 5 is more wasteful because it sounds complex.
• RAID 0 seems wrong: It feels counterintuitive that "striping" has zero overhead, but RAID 0 provides no fault tolerance at all - it trades safety for pure capacity.
• RAID 6 overhead scales with array size? No - it's always exactly 2 drives, not a percentage. A 10-drive RAID 6 still only loses 2 drives to parity.

No community discussion yet for this question.