BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

F.O.A.D.

On 9/8/13 12:21 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 08 Sep 2013 10:18:02 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 9/8/13 10:07 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 22:03:19 -0400, Earl wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 07 Sep 2013 16:15:04 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Why not RAID them? With 4 drives you can set up a fairly high
efficiency array and have a soft failure of any single drive. With
some controllers you don't even need to bring the system down to swap
out the bad drive. The whole thing is invisible to the OS.
SATA hardware itself is hot swap capable.

He can't afford to pay his taxes. Do you really think he can afford a
$1500 Raid controller?

$1500?

More like $40 and most SATA controllers support RAID. You may have to
pay a little more for RAID 5 but not much

My little server is running under RAID. Something called Synology Hybrid
RAID (SHR) with data protection of 1 disk fault-tolerance. I'm not sure
what the hell that means, actually.

That does sort of look like RAID 5.
Is that "backup" drive actually just the conglomerate "wasted" drive
in a RAID array?
Basically RAID 5 writes "stripes" across all of the drives in the
array and the way they are laid out, you have one more drive than the
amount of data you can store. When you lose one, the data can be
recovered from the stripes on the other drives.
You can hot swap out the bad one and the system will restore the array
while you work.

I am going the other way with mirroring. It is less efficient in drive
usage but even if you lose the array, you only lose that block of
data. (one drive's worth)

Greg: here's an interesting screen cap, a maintenance routine the
server runs periodically:

http://tinyurl.com/q8qjoju