On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 11:01:49PM -0500, Douglas Tutty wrote: > Thanks Mike, > > If I can attempt to summarize a portion of what you said: > > If the issue is resistance to data block errors, it doesn't > matter if I use a file system or not so I may as well use a file > system then if have difficulty, rip multiple copies of the file > system bit by bit and do majority rules. > > There's a package (forget the name) that will do this > with files: take multiple damaged copies and make one > good copy if possible. > > > Does the kernel software-raid in raid1 do this? Would there be any > advantage/disadvantage to putting three partitions on the drive and > setting them up as raid1? (and record the partition table [sfdisk -d] > separately)?
If the drive electronics fails, for example, or a piece of abrasive dirt is on the head during a seekm you lose all three partitions. Better to have one partition on each of three separate drives. My strategy? * RAID1 with two drives * reiserfs on the RAID (although I have been told that reiser has bad resistance to power failures, I haven't changed yet; it's wonderfully resilient to the software crashes I've been experiencing) * backup by copying everything onto a dismountable hard disk and keeping it on a shelf * critical data kept in textual form and checked into monotone, which is to be sync'ed to monotone repositories elsewhere (still setting this up). -- hendrik -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
