Re: Raid

I can't help but echo what Dave said.

Speaking as someone who has recently lost ~500gigs of archived music,
pictures and other personal files - don't do RAID-0 for anything you
can't stand to lose.

In my case, I had moved information off of a failing external drive to
an old scratch drive consisting of two drives in RAID-0, only to have
one of the two scratch drives fail within 3 days - before I could move
the data back off.

On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 5:17 PM, Dave Hall <dave-slg@dnh.sk.ca> wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 24, 2008 at 05:07:08PM -0600, Cliff Pryce wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Hello to all.
> >
> > Just wondering if anybody has any experience with raid0 and opinions
> > on using such.
>
> Don't do it. Your risk of losing data to a drive failure doubles for
> a pretty small performance gain. If you are relying on an on-board
> controller for the RAID, you are also at risk due to failure of the
> mainboard or the controller. Maybe not a big deal today but it will
> you will regret it if you have to find an identical or compatible set
> of hardware in two years time.
>
> --
>
> Dave
>
>
>
>
> --
> I'm interested in upgrading my 28.8 kilobaud internet connection to a
> 1.5 megabit fiberoptic T1 line. Will you be able to provide an IP
> router that's compatible with my token ring ethernet LAN configuration?
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message with the word "unsubscribe" (without the
> quotes) in the body to linux-request@slg.org
> Archives are at http://list.slg.org/
>
Received on Mon Mar 24 17:58:11 2008