Re: backup archive format saved to disk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 12/07/06 16:27, Mike McCarty wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>> RAID is *not* for archives!!!
> RAID was not designed for archives. I can see no reason why
> it wouldn't work for that. RAID 1, for example, is simply
> making two (or more) copies of the data. Are you saying that
> making more than one copy of a backup is not a reasonable
> The main advantages would be that one would essentially
> have burst error correction of the size of the disc
> (this being, with the FEC on the disc, if any, an
> interleaved code in effect), which is enormous, indeed,
> and economy in storage over using multiple copies, as
> illustrated above.
I'd only trust "RAID archiving" if the controller and a rescue CD
were also stored in the "archive location" along with the hard drives.
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
Is "common sense" really valid?
For example, it is "common sense" to white-power racists that
whites are superior to blacks, and that those with brown skins
are mud people.
However, that "common sense" is obviously wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----