On Mon, 07 May 2012 14:35:31 +0000, Camaleón wrote: (...)
> For the raided space, yes, but still you can "redistribute" the disk > better. Ah yes, this is true. (...) >> I'd like using green drives for this system. So low power consumption >> is a thing I try keep low. And until now they worked well (one false >> positive in two years is ok) > > Remember that a raided system is more exigent than a non-raided one. If > one of that "green" disks which is part of a raid level is put in stand- > by/sleep mode and does not respond as quickly as mdadm expects, the raid > manager can think the disk is lost/missing and will mark that disk as > "failed" (or will give I/O erros...), forcing a rebuild, etc... :-/ > > Those "green" disks can be good for using them as stand-alone devices > for user backup/archiving but not for 24/365 nor a NAS nor something > that requires quick access and fast speeds such a raid. I haven't thought about that. So the controller must be a bit more patient ;-) I will stay away from the green drives in future. >>>> I have an i3 in that machine and 4 GB RAM. I'll see if this is enough >>>> when I have to rebuild all the arrays :-) >>> >>> Mmm... I'd consider adding more RAM (at least 8 GB) though I would >>> prefer 16-32 GB) you have to feed your little "big monster" :-) >> >> That much :-O > > For RAM you never-ever get enough :-) > >> Ok, RAM is quite cheap and it shouldn't affect power consumption with >> in comparison to >20 hard disks. > > Exactly, your system will be happier and you won't have to worry in > increasing it for a near future (~5 years). My motto is "always fill > your system with the maximum amount of RAM, as much as you can afford", > you won't regret. Ok this sounds reasonable. But for 16 GB RAM I can get a 2 TB disk. So I will have to sleep in it :-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/joaolg$hvv$1...@dough.gmane.org
