w8imo@xxxxxxxx wrote:
If that's true, why did most of my accounts use RAID on their
mid-range AIX based systems?
Basic RAID is writing the data to two drives. If it is important
stuff and one drive fails you have a copy on the other so it isn't lost.
We're talking apples and oranges. You originally said several smaller
drives instead of one big drive; that only makes sense without RAID --
you said "even if it means two or three". Two smaller drives, or 3,
like 3 320s or two 500s, equal one 1TB only if used non-redundantly.
If you meant larger small drives, or more of them, used in RAID arrays,
that's different -- because there's redundancy to cover the higher
chance of failure.
And people like Lacie and even Western Digital have actually sold "1TB"
drives that were really two 500GB drives in one box. A number of people
have lost data through treating them as if they were single drives.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, dd-b@xxxxxxxx; http://dd-b.net/
Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/
Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/
Dragaera: http://dragaera.info
