-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/18/08 15:44, Mike Bird wrote: > On Tue March 18 2008 12:56:00 Michael S. Peek wrote: >> But now I'm looking to build replacement servers and I thought I would >> ask what the community uses for it's hardware RAID, and why? > > We use "nothing" for hardware RAID. Software RAID is much more > flexible. With hardware RAID you always need to have a spare > controller on hand, because without a matching replacement > controller you can't retrieve your data after a controller failure.
That's what dual redundant controllers are for. Both transfer data for the same "device", and if one fails, the other keeps on plugging away. Obviously, performance suffers, but at least the machine keeps on chugging until you can replace the dead controller. Does Linux have that capability? > The downside of software RAID is that it is slower when rebuilding. > However rebuilding is so rare that this is not a significant issue > for us. > > However if you're doing RAID-5 you're seriously exposed to data loss > from double drive failures, and a faster rebuild can help to reduce > that window of vulnerability. We've stopped using RAID-5. We use > RAID-1 (3-way in some applications) to make LVM physical volumes. - -- Ron Johnson, Jr. Jefferson LA USA "Working with women is a pain in the a**." My wife -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH4DYaS9HxQb37XmcRAu+eAKDPDXpWuHpeuVb1RTWiCGs7XjnmdgCfSSaO pdHWq9HgvuY7CYCbCpShYAE= =BwPe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
