2 Terabyte of RAID0

[addragyn]

Do you need any sort of performance or it this just a place to dump data?

Will this be jacked into the network or directly attached to the users machine?

 

[Armitage]

Originally posted by: addragyn
Do you need any sort of performance or it this just a place to dump data?

Will this be jacked into the network or directly attached to the users machine?

Mostly needs read performance on fairly large files (10 to 200MB), but the performance is not a driving parameter.
Will be on the network ... probably lots of access from our cluster.

If anything, I'd rather see them do JBOD ... then you only lose your data 250GB at a time.

As for the backup ... we just don't have the capacity.

 

[Tab]

Or he could just use JOBD... How is JOBD? Is that reativly stable?

 

[beatle]

JBOD (just a bunch of disks) or a spanned volume in Windows is the same thing. I run this in my backup server because it's easy to expand, and reliability isn't a concern because it's only used as a backup. Its reliability is marginally better than RAID 0 in that you don't lose all your data unless the drive with the MFT dies. If that drive goes, then you're screwed.

 

[DesolationWilliams]

how hard would it be do to a raid6 its the same thing as 5 except it has a double distributed parity. the only problem is that u couldnt do 2tb simply because it would require 16 hard drives.

 

[Alkali]

Ok, look....


If you have 8 drives available do this:

Raid 5 with 4 Disks
Raid 5 with the other 4 Disks

Raid 0 the arrays, and voila, you have superfast raid5, AKA Raid 50


Thats the best thing to do with 8 drives, but of course you only end up with 1TB....

 

[Lyfer]

Damn thats alot of disk space.

 

[Sunner]

Originally posted by: Alkali
Ok, look....


If you have 8 drives available do this:

Raid 5 with 4 Disks
Raid 5 with the other 4 Disks

Raid 0 the arrays, and voila, you have superfast raid5, AKA Raid 50


Thats the best thing to do with 8 drives, but of course you only end up with 1TB....

Unless my math is way off, he'd end up with ((4 * 250) - 250) * 2 = 1500 MB.

 

[DesolationWilliams]

Originally posted by: Sunner

Originally posted by: Alkali
Ok, look....


If you have 8 drives available do this:

Raid 5 with 4 Disks
Raid 5 with the other 4 Disks

Raid 0 the arrays, and voila, you have superfast raid5, AKA Raid 50


Thats the best thing to do with 8 drives, but of course you only end up with 1TB....

Unless my math is way off, he'd end up with ((4 * 250) - 250) * 2 = 1500 MB.

your correct.

 

[zephyrprime]

Perhaps you should also consider bigger drives. Hitachi makes a 400GB IDE.

 

[Alkali]

My mistake 🙂

Its funny my mind wasnt up to scratch when I wrote that last night, lol

 

[RS3RS]

This guy's an idiot... 8 drives in RAID 0... And I thought I'd heared it all :shocked:

 

[PlatinumGold]

nuts. with that much space, go stripe with parity. you only lose 1/3. spend the extra money, sheesh.

 

[anthrax]

RAID 5 doesn't have to be with 4 disks......there are implementation out that that do 7+1 RAID 5 and not the typical 3+1

 

[thorin]

IMHO it depends what it's used for. If you can afford it to be offline for 2 days while you restore from tape then it's just fine. If you can't afford it to be offline for 2 days during a tape restoration then obviously he's making the wrong choice.

Thorin

 

[imported_Nacelle]

That would make a nice Divx server with raid 5. I could box up all those movies that are taking up so much space. Put me down for one.