| 1 |
Mick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday 04 May 2015 08:46:26 Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>> I really do need to set up RAID at least for some stuff that I may not |
| 6 |
>>> be able to get back. Some videos I have are no longer available. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> RAID is not a backup solution. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Not only RAID 1 isn't a back up solution, because it offers temporary |
| 11 |
> redundancy rather than diverse protection, but under certain scenarios |
| 12 |
you |
| 13 |
> have a much higher chance of losing your data when the first drive |
| 14 |
fails. If |
| 15 |
> you bought two (or more) drives at the same time and built a RAID from |
| 16 |
them, |
| 17 |
> their failure performance due to same construction and age could be quite |
| 18 |
> similar. On many occasions your last healthy drive fails, just as you |
| 19 |
try to |
| 20 |
> rebuild the RAID. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I think this has happened to folks on this list. I've read about this |
| 25 |
somewhere before. It makes sense too. I'd like to have two different |
| 26 |
brands of drives if I could. That should spread things out, maybe. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Dale |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
:-) :-) |
Archives