> -----Original Message-----
> From: Theo Van Dinter [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 12:06 PM
> To: Gregory Leblanc
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: root on RAID
>
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2000 at 11:42:01AM -0800, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> > Mostly because it's (pardon my French) a bitch to recover
> from. RAID5 and
>
> ???
>
> > (although still not as easy as a plain mirror), while a
> stripe of two
> > mirrors (RAID01) is a real pain to recover from. Mostly
> this applies to
>
> ???
>
> How are you defining "recover from"? For a single disk
> failure, you're fine
> no matter what you do (unless you go linear/RAID0). Plug a
> replacement disk
> in, and you're hoopy.
>
> Are you talking about going from RAID to non-RAID?
Actually, I'm talking about OS failures, not disk failures. RAID protects
against disk railures, thus redundant array of disks, but doesn't do jack
for when the OS goes to hell. For production servers (where I work, at
least), disk failures are about equal with OS failures. For test servers,
100% of my failures are when I screw up the OS.
Greg
