The situation is quite similar when we disable the controller cache for RAID5 array. The biggest performance drop of 236% with enabled WT-caching takes place under linear workload. As the number of write requests increases in the queue, the performance difference between the operation with different caching types reduces. However, just as in RAID0 array, WB-caching is highly advantageous for all work modes with write requests.

The influence of WT-caching on the RAID10 array performance is negative in all work modes with available write requests. The maximum performance drop was 353%. However, as we have already mentioned above, disabling the controller cache leads to a performance drop in RandomRead mode when there are no write requests in the queue, which is bad.

So, we can conclude that enabled WT-caching reduces the performance significantly. Therefore, it is really hard to say what caching type is preferable for most efficient work. The reliability is higher in WriteThrough mode, however, in WriteBack mode the performance boost is definitely more tempting :)