Hardware Boost for Hard Drives

User Comments: 11

1. February 3, 2003 2:14 PM
   iss said:
   Raid is faster but it is also riskier. in a raid O setup if one drive fails you lose all the data on both drives.
   Reply
2. February 3, 2003 2:50 PM
   MrGaribaldi said:
   But if you can afford 4 drives, running RAID 0+1 should be both faster and safer... (since it's both striping and mirroring...)
   Reply
3. February 3, 2003 2:52 PM
   Phantasm66 said:
   I've never really gone for RAID 1. I would rather backup to another machine over a network connection, or to tape or something. My plans for 4 HDDs would be purely RAID 0.
   Reply
4. February 3, 2003 4:39 PM
   Rick said:
   [quote][i]Originally posted by iss [/i][b]Raid is faster but it is also riskier. in a raid O setup if one drive fails you lose all the data on both drives. [/b][/quote] I suppose.. But stastically, wouldn't your chances of 1 out 2 hard disks failing be the same as a single drive failing? :)You wouldn't be putting yourself in more danger necessarily, since your chances of a failing drive and equally picked among both single and double drive setups. Yeah? :confused: And if you do something wrong to your RAID setup (user error), corrupting your partitinos or whatnot - Would this have not happened to a single drive anyway... if you never had chosen to use RAID in the first place?Allow me to hop into Phantasm66's time machine and find out...
   Reply
5. February 3, 2003 5:44 PM
   iss said:
   [quote]I suppose.. But stastically, wouldn't your chances of 1 out 2 hard disks failing be the same as a single drive failing? [/quote] well I would actually feel more secure with two seagate drives in a raid 0 setup than I would with one IBM 60 Gb drive. :D
   Reply
6. February 3, 2003 6:14 PM
   ---agissi--- said:
   Techspot, Raid has always appealed to me....its just I've never really knowen how to set it up ;) I also think it would make a good article, please take this into consideration.Thanks!
   Reply
7. February 3, 2003 6:36 PM
   Rick said:
   [quote][i]Originally posted by iss [/i][b]well I would actually feel more secure with two seagate drives in a raid 0 setup than I would with one IBM 60 Gb drive. :D [/b][/quote] Same here... :o
   Reply
8. February 4, 2003 6:47 AM
   Phantasm66 said:
   [quote][i]Originally posted by Rick [/i][b]time machine and find out... [/b][/quote] Always at your disposal....[img]http://phantazmm.freeservers.com/tardis.gif
   /img]
   Reply
9. February 4, 2003 9:37 AM
   StormBringer said:
   This may sound odd, but I swear that thing is larger inside than it is outside. ;) BTW Agissi, if you use the SEARCH feature, you can find some great info here on RAID. At one time there was a Sticky post in Storage outlining RAID.
   Reply
10. February 4, 2003 10:49 AM
    Per Hansson said:
    [quote][i]Originally posted by ---agissi--- [/i][b]Techspot, Raid has always appealed to me....its just I've never really knowen how to set it up ;) I also think it would make a good article, please take this into consideration.Thanks! [/b][/quote]I believe I'm the only one in the staff that runs a RAID-0 setup, so if enough people want it; sure I'll write an article on it...
    Reply
11. February 4, 2003 12:36 PM
    Phantasm66 said:
    I also have RAID-0, I think 1-2 other members might as well....Stormbinger.....I think he has RAID-0???
    Reply

Recently commented stories