Guest DC Power Kyle Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 0 FTW in non production environments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treossi Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 yeah i know... but i'd setup 1+0 and call it a day Quote Team sundownWESTCOASTSPL.COM we're throwing dbdrag events very soon visit the website for details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpedout97x Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 OR a raid 60 I prefer 1+0 over 0+1 All in all, RAID 5 and RAID 6 are very very reliable.. I had them running in hardcore I/O for over a year for problems. Yes, raids can go wrong and can screw up.... just like anything can. It's a risk that you're gonna have to take. You can always make an off RAID backup as well. i agree they are reliable, and i personally think that during the event of a URE when rebuilding (if i ever have to rebuild, ive NEVER has a western digital caviar black drive fail on me) i would think that instead of the raid failing or all the data being lost, it would result in that file that its trying to read being corrupt on the new replacement drive. i also think that since its only "reading" the data off the non failed drives, even if a URE occurs, shouldnt the data on the non failed drives stay? i mean if a URE happens when ur not rebuliding raid, say ur opening a song and it happens to be that 12th tb of data being read....shouldnt they stay intact, and u can just restart the rebuild of the array? thats my logic of it at least. yeah raid 1+0 seems the best route to go...speed and redundant... and 1tb drives have a really shitty failure rate too i agree to a point, but ive seen more of the 1.5tb drives fail, mostly the seagate ones (my friend has a bunch, and they're all crap) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treossi Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 i agree they are reliable, and i personally think that during the event of a URE when rebuilding (if i ever have to rebuild, ive NEVER has a western digital caviar black drive fail on me) i would think that instead of the raid failing or all the data being lost, it would result in that file that its trying to read being corrupt on the new replacement drive.i also think that since its only "reading" the data off the non failed drives, even if a URE occurs, shouldnt the data on the non failed drives stay? i mean if a URE happens when ur not rebuliding raid, say ur opening a song and it happens to be that 12th tb of data being read....shouldnt they stay intact, and u can just restart the rebuild of the array? thats my logic of it at least. i agree to a point, but ive seen more of the 1.5tb drives fail, mostly the seagate ones (my friend has a bunch, and they're all crap) yep i've seen it too and they were seagate Quote Team sundownWESTCOASTSPL.COM we're throwing dbdrag events very soon visit the website for details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpedout97x Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 so with that board 1+0 is still possible... i'd go that route it'd probably end up being pretty fast... what are you going to use all this space for? i get media in crazy amounts and i can't even fill my 2tb's... i delete a lot of shit though mainly media, blu ray movies, songs etc...i only have 500gb in my other pc so i had stopped downloading shit. the movies, if those get lost i wouldnt mind as much, but music that ive been downloading for yrs, id hate for it to be lost Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treossi Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 i see!! with blue ray it kinda fills up fast Quote Team sundownWESTCOASTSPL.COM we're throwing dbdrag events very soon visit the website for details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpedout97x Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 Honestly dude, go with a RAID 5. We're not talking about millions of dollars worth of stuff. RAID it all in a 5, then get another drive to back it up if you're so skeptical. Raid 5 will slow down your I/O if you don't have a dedicated RAID cpu which is not built in to motherboard raid chipsets.Either Raid 0 it with backups, RAID 5 with (N-1) space with a little bit of a slowdown, or RAID 0+1 it with 50% space. I would go with a RAID 0 with nightly backups OR hell hourly backups. whats the difference in going raid 0+1 vs 1+0? is one more redundant/fast than the other? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treossi Posted October 31, 2009 Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 nothing Quote Team sundownWESTCOASTSPL.COM we're throwing dbdrag events very soon visit the website for details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpedout97x Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 i see!! with blue ray it kinda fills up fast hell yea they do lol. i mean i could delete after i watch them, but i like to have them incase i ever wanna watch them again, or for friends, etc. i wanna set up an ftp server so some of my friends can get my music/movies, and also a few of them that id let add music to mine but yea we just set up our HT at my dads house, and compared to the blurays ive downloaded, dvds, even actual dvd's purchased look like shit (compared to bluray), even upconverted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pimpedout97x Posted October 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 31, 2009 nothing so its just one is a mirrored set of 2 stripped arrays, and the other is vise versa? so its like jus pick whichever i want? theres gotta be a difference i would imagine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.