> 2- I know that's not the case here, but I always cringe when I see the faith > some people put in RAID. It's not a magic bullet. Mechanical drives have a > higher probability of failing than the rest of the system so it makes sense, > specially to avoid down time. Data safety is guaranteed by backups. Only by > backups. On that note, I don't see the point of mirroring or striping SSD. > Are they really that much unreliable than the computer itself? The power > supply? The operator of the computer? :-) Why WOULDN'T you raid? Restoring from backup is a catastrophic recovery mode. I don't want tape backup to be my ONLY resiliency method, because it means you're in for many hours of downtime. RAID gives you resiliency against non-catastrophic failure modes. From my perspective, RAID is saving me from my drive dying; backup is saving me from my building burning down. RAID != Backup, unquestionably, but it's a crucial component in an HA environment. As far as whether drives are more or less reliable than any other component, I would say "who cares" -- you make it all redundant at multiple levels, because ANY component can fail. Is it more reliable than the computer? No -- that's why we always have at least 2. Is it more reliable than the power supply? No, that's why every computer has two power supplies. Is it more resilient than the operator? Definitely not -- we have a couple of those, too :)
ms _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-deploy mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-deploy/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
