From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0B6C138CC5 for ; Mon, 4 May 2015 08:26:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 593E9E0917; Mon, 4 May 2015 08:26:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-f171.google.com (mail-qk0-f171.google.com [209.85.220.171]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 201ACE0885 for ; Mon, 4 May 2015 08:26:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qkgx75 with SMTP id x75so80668274qkg.1 for ; Mon, 04 May 2015 01:26:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=Q1uyZZivvfINweATjLIYRmDeDA7HpmHLtDLlXfw4qWE=; b=Jf/3WePgXt+TE0Zx/KUc2NzCj9xROjroMG0n42MH4Cnpn4bQ1wSDhySGyj59LBAKyv KP9RMAK8EBCg67WcA+OwEkkj+G5hE39iNxQAl+/e5QSLGuklCmvJ7gQO/rQY1SUyM5OF qqAPNV2xACtbma4vseeBvEvYiOkiG/1fxGcQGymR+einQ++IP8TM0rTcxVYX+MuNsYJj PhnToqaXFQBK8MHeE+yJRjET6JiDzQ79/l+1x6Y4azJd7rHWRM22gBZff8BYcCGIoLi7 5x5CRGMZVgw+vSsXtqHI1qafXNEjMjv613yutM6Vi5Jg5NWL+jH0TQEpstox4p66Xprg nXug== X-Received: by 10.140.98.148 with SMTP id o20mr24658421qge.99.1430727978534; Mon, 04 May 2015 01:26:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-98-95-106-170.jan.bellsouth.net. [98.95.106.170]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 72sm24442338qhx.32.2015.05.04.01.26.17 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 04 May 2015 01:26:17 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <55472D28.70804@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 04 May 2015 03:26:16 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:35.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/35.0 SeaMonkey/2.32 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Hard drive storage questions References: <553F474E.4040101@gmail.com> <5547221E.4020809@gmail.com> <20150504084626.26fbbbd8@digimed.co.uk> <201505040913.16093.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201505040913.16093.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070706080308080904040707" X-Archives-Salt: 3b6ddf3f-d648-4169-aa6a-6e5c519fac39 X-Archives-Hash: 3f9001670ed5b2b313d1f044666e59ae This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070706080308080904040707 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mick wrote: > On Monday 04 May 2015 08:46:26 Neil Bothwick wrote: >> On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote: > >>> I really do need to set up RAID at least for some stuff that I may not >>> be able to get back. Some videos I have are no longer available. >> >> RAID is not a backup solution. > > Not only RAID 1 isn't a back up solution, because it offers temporary > redundancy rather than diverse protection, but under certain scenarios you > have a much higher chance of losing your data when the first drive fails. If > you bought two (or more) drives at the same time and built a RAID from them, > their failure performance due to same construction and age could be quite > similar. On many occasions your last healthy drive fails, just as you try to > rebuild the RAID. > I think this has happened to folks on this list. I've read about this somewhere before. It makes sense too. I'd like to have two different brands of drives if I could. That should spread things out, maybe. Dale :-) :-) --------------070706080308080904040707 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mick wrote:
> On Monday 04 May 2015 08:46:26 Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Mon, 04 May 2015 02:39:10 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>>> I really do need to set up RAID at least for some stuff that I may not
>>> be able to get back.  Some videos I have are no longer available.
>>
>> RAID is not a backup solution.
>
> Not only RAID 1 isn't a back up solution, because it offers temporary
> redundancy rather than diverse protection, but under certain scenarios you
> have a much higher chance of losing your data when the first drive fails.  If
> you bought two (or more) drives at the same time and built a RAID from them,
> their failure performance due to same construction and age could be quite
> similar.  On many occasions your last healthy drive fails, just as you try to
> rebuild the RAID.
>


I think this has happened to folks on this list.  I've read about this somewhere before.  It makes sense too.  I'd like to have two different brands of drives if I could.  That should spread things out, maybe.

Dale

:-)  :-)

--------------070706080308080904040707--