RE: Cheapest way to acheive RAID5 ?

["Paul Gordon" <paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My thoughts.....
=20
=20
>Suggestions appreciated, and is RAID5 the best way to protect them ?

I suspect not, with the el-cheapo hardware that is typically profferred
for=
home use. I think I recall a number of list-members who's RAID controller =
lost the whole array when a single drive failed. I've certainly heard
numer=
ous anecdotal stories of the total un-dependability of cheapo RAID 5
contro=
llers. If you want to do RAID5 properly, IMHO the only way to do it
current=
ly is with SCSI, and with a decent controller with on-board processing,
and=
on-board BATTERY BACKED cache. - The sort of stuff not usually availble fo=
r peanuts! SATA may improve this situation a bit, since it, too, is being
d=
esigned with hot-plugging in mind....

My current strategy is to use disk arrays in striped volume sets (no
redund=
ancy, but no lost capacity), but to have two machines with similar arrays
i=
n them, and mirror data over the LAN. Of course there are both up and down
=
sides to this...=20=20

- I do of course need lots of drives, - but I've never found this to be a
p=
roblem, as over the years I have done so many upgrades that I already had
a=
cupboard full of spares. As an example, currently sitting on my desk at ho=
me I have a pile of 6 x 120GB drives piled up that have all been pulled
fro=
m other PC's in the house when I upgraded. (and no, they're not for
sale!!!=
- I use them as off-line backups)

-There's also the issue of mirroring the data between two machines over
the=
LAN. This is however a childishly simple "set-and-forget" task if
you do i=
t right... There are loads of ways to do this, and many of them are
totally=
free.

On the upside, it does mean that an array can fail (and if any single
drive=
fails, then the array it's in has therefore failed), but I still have a fu=
ll online copy on another box. Having a second copy can also be an
advantag=
e on occasion, as it means I can work on one copy, and if something goes
wr=
ong (I balls up the data in other words), then I have a previous copy that
=
I can go back to.... With a single big array, you are NOT protected
against=
logical data corruption, unless you put strategies in place to provide sha=
dow copies.

=20

>Is anyone else using Amazon to boost their DVD collection ? - 6 DVD's
for
>=A39.99 a month, should have a good collection by the end of the year
;)


How about =A314.99 a month for "unlimited" DVD rentals? - I
joined "I Love =
Film" a while ago, and I can have 3 DVD's at a time for that price.
typical=
turnaround time is 3-5 days (they all go by 1st class post, and they are v=
ery quick at their end to send out the next ones as soon as they've
receive=
d the previous ones back), so if I'm quick to send them back, I can
usually=
fit 4-5 cycles in a month, so 12-15 DVD's a month for fifteen quid, no pos=
tage costs, and I don't have to buy a bigger cupboard to fit them all in!

=20
Paul G.

________________________________






Dean.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]