Re: question about the best suited RAID level/layout

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, 2013-07-05 at 13:10 +0200, David Brown wrote:
> I apologise if this is preaching to the converted.  When you are
> concerned about data resilience, RAID is only part of the answer - I
> just want to make sure you have considered everything else.
Sure... I make regular complete backups, on different types of storage
media (magnetic vs. optical - yes I do fear very strong coronal mass
ejections ;-) )... being placed in different locations (even different
cities ;)

> The main benefit of RAID is availability - you don't have downtime when
> a disk fails.  It also ensures that you don't lose data that is created
> between backup runs.  But it is not the solution for data safety and
> reliability - that is what backups are for.
Sure...


> You need to look at the complete picture here.  What are the risks to
> your data?  Is a double disk failure /really/ the most likely failure
> scenario?  Have you considered the likelihood and consequences of other
> failure types?  In my experience, user error is a bigger risk to data
> loss than a double disk failure - I have more often restored from backup
> due to someone deleting the wrong files (or losing them due to slipping
> when dragging-and-dropping) than from disk problems, even with non-raid
> setups.
Hehe... I once accidentally mke2fs'ed (instead of fsck) over my main
personal data fs (and fucking e2fsprogs don't check for existing
fs/containers, AFAIK till today)... and back then my most recent backup
was really old... like 2 years or so...
I invested like 2 weeks of ext4 forensic and managed to basically
recover all of the data out of the overwritten fs... ;)



> Raid will help if one of your disk dies, but it will not help against
> fire or theft, or hardware failure on the NAS, or software failure, or
> user error, or malware (if you have windows clients), or power failure,
> or any one of a number of different scenarios.
> 
> So depending on your circumstances, you might get better "data
> security/resilience" by putting the extra disks in a second machine at a
> second location, or other mixed primary/secondary arrangements.
sure... see above... I do have a good backup strategy now :)

Anyway... for the daily growth of data... RAID does a good "backup-like"
job in helping me against disk failures... since I simlpy can't backup
everything every day...


Cheers,
Chris.

<<attachment: smime.p7s>>


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux