[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
I actually meant to type 1+0 but your comment got me thinking and it does look like 0+1 is considered sometimes...but anyway, I wasn't trying to be confrontational at all. Steve asked about RAID in a consumer PC environment and I have two home/consumer RAID systems in operation so I relayed my opinion.
Given the choice I'd go RAID 5 all over again because it's a good compromise.
So anyway, I do have to point out that arguing that one extra hard drive isn't significant over the lifetime of a PC and then in the next sentence talking about the "Vampire" incremental 1 to 10 watts drawn by a typical primary side of an inactive plug-in transformer doesn't make too much sense. A typical hard drive will use about 8 watts average when idle and 11 average watts (Deskstar 75GXP) when active (average, not even peak)--and the wattage we're considering here is more expensive rectified/clean power that has already gone through conversion losses in the primary power supply. If you care about "Vampires" you should really care about one extra hard drive.
Also, in my experience running a bunch of hard drives in a home PC sized case witout extra fans for the drives (relying on the power supply fan, as you state above) is a really bad idea in my experience and I wouldn't recommend that to anyone.
I agree, it's a good idea to have some type of recovery software. I have a decent package and have recovered things for people. I've personally recovered deleted files from a sales rep who left my company in an unhappy mood--found some other interesting stuff too. As long as the hard drive is still mechanically sound and the information has not been fully overwritten by something else the info is still there, regardless of whether the operating systems knows it or is even operational, even if the file system is not intact (depending upon what you're calling a "file system"). If you need to open the thing up in a clean room and do mechanical repairs that's a whole other i$$ue.
As far as whether *I* have ever rebuilt a RAID5 array I can happily report that no, to date I haven't needed to. However, I have rebuilt multiple RAID1 arrays and your point about needing to replace a failed RAID5 drive with one of equal or greater size applies to RAID1 as well in most cases (the only exception being if the remaining good drive was already smaller than the failed drive--but who would deliberately build a new system that way?). The failed RAID1 member can only be replaced with a drive equal-to or greater than the size of the remaining functioning drive; so I guess I don't understand your point.
posted by 72.181.217...
, Thu, 26 Oct 2006 02:04:50
, Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:42:54
, Thu, 26 Oct 2006 10:53:32, Wed, 25 Oct 2006 15:40:47
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
