 | | | RAID choices | RAID choices 2004-09-15 - By Patrick A Thompson
Back
My experience (not all of it nice) is that
it is worth while to consider the specific situation.
One size does not fit all.
1) Is the rather small improvement in speed worth
the added hassle and vulnerability of RAID 0,5
2) What failure modes are most likely.
Individual hardware failures
Simultaneous hardware failures
Software/coding failures
The approach is different for each failure
scenario.
Anything that can not be reconstructed needs to be written
to removable media.
I happily set up a RAID-1 (See http://AID-1.ora-code.com) system and thought I was
protected from anything. Coding and user errors
simultaneously trashed both partitions. :=((
I now use what I call "slow cycle" RAID-1 (See http://AID-1.ora-code.com). Every morning,
the primary disk is copied (compressed) onto the
secondary disk. In my environment, human failures
are much more likely than hardware failures. This
"slow cycle" approach also protects against the all too
common --- rm wrongfile --
Pat
__ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____
Valhalla-list mailing list
Valhalla-list@(protected)
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/valhalla-list
|
|
|