MS SQL 2000 and raid controller

I heard that is said that MSQ SQL 2000 doesn't work correctly with raid (for example raid 5)
I have my application in 2 companies. The first one with not a raid controller (even though the computer has a raid controller) executes a backup when no users are online in more than 8 minuter and the file of the database backup is 3,5 GB. The memory of the computer is 2GB.
In the other company when more than 20 users work in the database with a raid controller the backup is occured in 2,6 minutes and the database backup file is more than 6 GB. The memory of this computer is 4 GB.
What is your opinion?
Is this rumor true?
Do you suggest I should apply raid 5 to the first server?
Regards,
ManolisI am not sure what the problem is you think you have identified. Do you want to explain a little more.

If the rumor is true, which I extremely doubt, thousands and thousands of organizations are in trouble. I think you have been talking to sme stuffed shirt wind bag.|||I've used many versions of Microsoft SQL (even before Microsoft bought it). I've used every version since 4.2 (1994) on RAID controllers of various kinds. The only problems I've ever had with RAID controllers have been outright hardware failures, no RAID / MSSQL software related issues.

I would be astonished if there is any problem using SQL Server (any version) with a RAID controller.

-PatP|||I can add one more to Pat's list, but it is narrowly defined. If your raid controller buffers the writes, on a system with heavy i/o, you might get a stale read error when SQL Server reads from the disk again after a write was issued, but held in buffer.

The resolution to that is to decrease the size of the write buffer.

Besides ... without utilizing RAID configurations, have you seen the size of a
petabyte disk drive? :rolleyes: