-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 08:53:34PM +1300, Apptech wrote:
> He argues that RAID typically reduces reliability.
> ie done well it can be an improvement, but ... . 
>  
> Makes some sense.
> What do others think
> 
>     http://www.pugetsystems.com/articles?&id=29

I've had much better experiences than that using software raid on Linux.
Saved many hours of restoring from backups twice now. But then again,
that particular client has 750gb of data, stored on a RAID1 array, with
another two 750gb drives for live backups, one of which is stored
off-site. Not to mention the yet another automated off-site backup for
the 15gb of "really critical" data we have. Restores are testing every
once in awhile, like when I accidentally delete a file...

The point being, we know what we're doing, raid is just to save me a few
hours of downtime and annoying backup restoration when the inevitable
failure happens.

- -- 
http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHwTDb3bMhDbI9xWQRAvxXAKCo1Ew9/alii3KTIoVuOJCwNW6SQgCfcSmf
MN/O6gVwa6EuN5zogS/glDw=
=tNCK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist