Great...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| rnturn Mar 27, 2015 12:50 PM EDT |
How many people are going to follow this advice and lose ALL of their data when one of those drives fails? A 1TB or 2TB drive is inexpensive enough -- even considering the enterprise-class drives that are strongly suggested for use in RAID setups -- nowadays that, IMHO, it's criminal to suggest that users set up RAID 0 devices when they should be setting up RAID 1. (Hey look! You still get to use a "cool acronym".) Either way you still have to do something that's still considered decidedly UNcool -- backups -- though I would be a lot more nervous about missing a backup of a RAID 0 device than I would a RAID 1. |
| ljmp Mar 27, 2015 2:23 PM EDT |
@rnturn: I agree. RAID0 has always seemed a bit pointless to me too. I suppose it had its use for combining drives before lvm made it trivial to combine and resize and recombine drive space resources. I would also recommend SAS drives rather than SATA for setting up RAID1. SAS is much more expensive, but tons more reliable in my experience. |
| CFWhitman Mar 27, 2015 4:57 PM EDT |
Well, RAID 0 definitely does increase performance when using magnetic hard drives (not with SSDs). However, it's not worth it by itself. I highly recommend mirroring over RAID 0 if you don't have enough drives to do both. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!