there are a lot of people out there still thinking, that Raid 0 is a good choice to work with. i have to say that it isn't.
We started off around 15 years ago with SCSI Raid 0, because we had no choice. Back-up was crucial. HD space was limited, HD wasn't really common. We ended up with around 500 GB Raid 0 in a SCSI row of 8 HD's (10 was maximum).
During the time of about 3-5 years I ended with 3 failures, which meant a total loss of data (we could built up a new raid 0 system and used our back-up to get the data back to work).
Then came Xraid Serve - a tremendous but expensive system - but it had Raid 5 - bless god. Our Xraids are still working! - for ten years now. Some of the drives have 100 000 working hours!
10 years working with Raid 5 meant no total data miss. We've replaced the one or the other drive, or we have replaced the whole array (mainly after 50-70.000 working hours), but we didn't loose a whole array!
Now we work with arrays, that have 24 drives on Raid 6 plus spare. Up to now, not even a Harddrive has gone. So guys, don't tell me that Raid 0 is better than Raid 5 or 6.
If you can, you should work on Raid 5, if you can, you should work with Raid 5+spare, and if you are able to, you should work with Raid 6+spare - because reliability of a system is one of the most important things we should achieve - before price! I've never regretted the most expensive solutions in our business, but I've regretted a lot of the cheap ones.
Mac pro 8core
several raid systems