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

Re: hard- or software-raid?

On Fri, 24 Jan 2003 10:26, Tinus Nijmeijers wrote:
> My question kind'a stands: If the only thing I ask of it is for the data
> to be safe (no speed or "no downtime!" issues) is there any reason to
> use hardware over software raid?


> I do not care if I have to take the server down for an hour (or 2, or 3)
> to replace a disk, be it a raid disk or boot disk. I have plenty of
> time, I could even run down to the store, get a new bootdisk, install
> debian and be up and running in 2 hours. no problem.
> ONLY thing that is important is that the data needs to be safe. if 2 of
> the raid-disks fail I need the data to be safe.

Then put three disks in a RAID-1 so that if two disks die at the same time you 
still won't lose any data.  With flakey drives such as the Hungarian 
Death-Star's from IBM you can lose two drives in such a short time period 
that you can't replace one before the other dies.

Scenario 0: Boot of a software RAID-1 of two 200G IDE disks, tape backup
Costs the same as scenario 1 but performs better and is easier to manage.

> Is hardware raid "safer"?
> (I do not think it is, I'm just waiting for someone to tell me I'm being
> naive here)

No.  In fact it's less safe because you don't have such direct control over 
what it's doing.  You have to go through a hardware-RAID BIOS menu or 
something to set it up and the disk formats are not documented anywhere.

With software RAID-1 you can mount any disk independantly of the RAID which 
can really help you on occasion.

http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/   My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/  Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/    Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/  My home page

Reply to: