Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

RAID explained ?!

<< < (3/3)

tomos:
f0dder,
in spite of the fact you're speaking a very different language to me -
and,
I'm not talking Danish here  ;) :)

You have, I believe summarised the reason for raid very nicely
.
Mirroring (and raid-5 and raid-6 etc) is not a substitute for backups, and only retards use it that way. They're intended to protect against disk crashes before the nightly backup, so you don't lose a day's worth of work. And they're intended to be able to keep your data available while hotplugging a spare disk and replicating your array, as opposed to shutting down the server, replacing disks, and restoring from (last night's) backups..
and also helped me realise I don't really need that kind of thing -
and I don't think I will either ..
(although I may have to "juggle around a lot with (very) big files" in the near future & the prospect has been bothering me, but more in the sense of doing incremental backups ... but I think I can always burn older backups to DVD if necessary)

But, again,
it's interesting to hear about the hardware setups people are using ...

Lashiec:
Btw, software raid isn't all that bad - for consumer on-board raid, lots of stuff is being done in software by drivers, and performance is still decent. It's only if you want big and really fast arrays that hardware solutions are really necessary. And if you want big arrays, you're probably doing it for a file server, that probably won't be spending CPU cycles on much else... so the hardware solution is really only if you build a weak system, or if you go all the way with battery-backed ram on the controller for safe caching :)
-f0dder (June 01, 2007, 06:46 AM)
--- End quote ---

The problem is not performance, but security and reliability. Adaptec is not selling RAID controllers at 200 € just to make us poorer, you know.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page