On 2022-11-08, The Wanderer <wande...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > > That more general sense of "backup" as in "something that you can fall > back on" is no less legitimate than the technical sense given above, and > it always rubs me the wrong way to see the unconditional "RAID is not a > backup" trotted out blindly as if that technical sense were the only one > that could possibly be considered applicable, and without any > acknowledgment of the limited sense of "backup" which is being used in > that statement. >
Maybe it's a question of intent more than anything else. I thought RAID was intended for a server scenario where if a disk fails, you're down time is virtually null, whereas as a backup is intended to prevent data loss. RAID isn't ideal for the latter because it doesn't ship the saved data off-site from the original data (or maybe a RAID array is conceivable over a network and a distance?). Of course, I wouldn't know one way or another, but the complexity (and substantial verbosity) of this thread seem to indicate that that all these concepts cannot be expressed clearly and succinctly, from which I draw my own conclusions.
