>>52238978 having one redundant disk out of ten, you might as well not have it, it's basically a retarded setup that's all but guaranteed to lose another disk and thus everything if they ever need to resilver after a drive failure, which btw will take an insanely long time with 4TB drives.
>>52239193 >would be almost a mathematical impossiblity If the bit read error rates were actually accurate, as in properly working HDDs actually failed to read as often as that, you wouldn't even be able to read the data on a 100% functional 3TB HDD like 5 times.
>>52239277 >No dedicated raid card They don't protect against bit rot any more than soft RAID, but if the card fails your data can be fucked if you don't have the exact same card as a spare.
Rather than spending money on a RAID card to avoid the write hole, I'd rather spend the money on an UPS for the entire server and run software RAID. That way the server can shut down the array and entire OS properly and everything is protected, not just the RAID controller's cache.
>>52239419 Software raid is irrelevent for anything beyond teenagers playing with their first computer.
You cant change your os choice in software raid.Even then your new distro might not support the same version or even them, the same software raid.
Dedicated raid cards arent even expensive.
I've had the same 20tb raid-6 for the past 10 years and only had 2 drives fail, at different times.I woke up boom everything nice and cozy rma'd the drive and went on like nothing happened. Now with your software raid you have to be IN your os to do anything,if you lose ac power/ and/or ups power(yes you can have extended downtime in major cities rarely) you're sitting on your dick. Plus BBU allows better caching then you can ever expect on software.
>>52239419 >They don't protect against bit rot any more than soft RAID But they do, they have patrol reads which will find read problems before they cause data loss. >Exact same card as a spare Wrong again, hardware RAID has a fairly standardized metadata format (DDF), so as long as the new card supports the RAID level and stripe size of the array, it can import the array. I haven't tried jumping to a different manufacturer but I've used the same array on 3 different LSI cards and it's worked fine. >Rather than spending money on a RAID card to avoid the write hole, I'd rather spend the money on an UPS for the entire server and run software RAID Does nothing if the problem is an OS-level crash, or a problem with the PSU or other part causes the system to power off unexpectedly. Having both a UPS and RAID card is best, of course.
>>52240102 RAID IS A HOT SWAP LIVE BACKUP SOLUTION YOU HAVE A NEW DRIVE BACKING UP THE DRIVE THAT FAILED. NOW IF YOU MEAN SOFTWARE WISE THEN YES IT IS NOT A BACKUP SOLUTION. RAID IS A HARDWARE BACKUP SOLUTION
>>52240187 it is literally replacing the parity and data that was on the drive that failed. Yes it is backing up,but not your data,it dosent care about your data.Based raid array only cares that it has full parity on its entire life.that why it has 1+ drives sitting in its asshole waiting for something to happen. So yes it is a hardware backup.
>>52238349 Building a more reasonable box. Ceph is a pig, and zfs is not known to be. Even for ceph they only recommend 1GB of RAM port TB of raw storage, so your at overkill there, but RAM is cheap enough I guess.
For the most part, a RAID z box will have the same needs as a software RAID box with add many drives, and you can't really go cheaper.
>>52240159 Raid is not a backup solution. Raid adds additional performance and convenience for replacing failed drives.
Critical data needs to be backed up. That means having at least one copy offsite to protect against fire and theft. Raid does not achieve an offsite backup, because it's not a backup it's just a redundancy.
Hardware raid is better if it has a battery backup to cache writes, so in the case of a power failure or unplanned shutdown during writes the data will not be corrupted. It still does not make it a backup solution because if the hardware was stolen, the data would be unrecoverable.
>>52240583 >hardware was stolen, the data would be unrecoverable. Im not sure what your burglary rates are in your shithole.But saying that is the same as claiming a nuke might land on YOU AND your tape offsite backup array. Its just retarded.
Raid takes a blank unpartitioned harddrive. Imports it in to the raid. it then writes parity data and your data to it. this is the definition of a backup Something that was there is lost,and now you are importing a new drive and writing it back on to it. It is a hardware backup solution.
>>52240583 you're picking nits over the semantics of backing up. if you ask people what icloud and dropbox and whatnot are for, they understand that they use that stuff for the "backing up" that you're talking about: the kind of off-site version control that's so off-site that you can't throw a rock real hard and wang the computer holding the data.
So why are you guys getting all semantically upset about people also using the word "backup" to refer to ensuring continued operation through a hardware failure? is it that the word's getting overloaded? shit happens. deal with it.
>>52240679 Ahahaha holy snit this generation is literally retarded. Theft, Sabotage, Fires don't happen.
You don't have any critical data to lose or protect. You also don't understand that disasters happen. For example: you don't put on a seat-belt because you are planning to crash into someone. You put a seat-belt on as a safety precaution so that if something terrible happens you have less of a chance of getting FUCKED. Or you are an idiot and don't wear a seat-belt under the delusion it makes you look cool.
Is this a new generation thing? Backups are lame and you need to be an edgelord who speeds without a seat-belt on and runs 24 disks in raid 0 with critical production data.
>>52240702 Raid was never created or intended to be a backup solution. RAID is an acronym that stands for Redundant array of independent disks. You should attempt to educate yourself between the difference of a redundancy and a backup. They have different purposes.
>>52240947 That's a pretty small customer list compared to the likes of other backup companies. Plus that's a backup provider, as long as they don't lose me data I couldn't care less what technologies they use to store the data
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.