Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 14:22, Robert Webb wrote: > > > Dave Sherohman wrote: [snip] > yup, there IDE RAID controllers out there. Whether they help speed or > not I don't know. > I am actually running one that does only RAID 1 for redundancy for my > firewall. Cannot > afford to have that go down

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q) - fw

2002-06-10 Thread Alvin Oga
hi ya robert why not have two firewalls ??? ( 2x pentium-90Mhz for example .. something cheap, but fast enough) +-- fw1 --+ internet -> csu/dus -> hub -> + +--> hub -> your lan +-- fw2 --+ when one goes down use the other ...

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 13:39, Dave Sherohman wrote: > On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 12:07:22PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > > The problem with JBODs (just big ole disks, i.e. single disks) > > JBOD = Just a Bunch Of Disks, i.e., several drives operating > independently. A JBOD can be organized into a RAI

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Robert Webb
Dave Sherohman wrote: [snip] Any sort of true hardware RAID setup (beware the hybrids, since this doesn't apply to them) will interact with the rest of the system as a single device. The question of whether to put the individual drives on separate controllers or not doesn't apply, since the d

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Dave Sherohman
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 10:00:16AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote: > So, the way I'm reading this, a RAID 5 stack w/ 5 20 GB hard drives > provides improved access speed and reliability at the cost of slightly > reduced storage. Yep. Different RAID levels are basically different tradeoffs between

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Dave Sherohman
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 12:07:22PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote: > The problem with JBODs (just big ole disks, i.e. single disks) JBOD = Just a Bunch Of Disks, i.e., several drives operating independently. A JBOD can be organized into a RAID, but doesn't have to be. > With RAID solutions, the read-w

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Dave Sherohman
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 09:46:45AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote: > So then, the primary advantages of RAID are access speed and data > redundancy The primary advantages of RAID are highly dependent on what flavor of RAID you're using. RAID0 and RAID1, e.g., are practically the opposite of each ot

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Ron Johnson
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 08:46, Ian D. Stewart wrote: > On 2002.06.10 03:35 Anthony DeRobertis wrote: > > On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:33, Alvin Oga wrote: > > > > > if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter > > > if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping ) > > > > No, it does matter. You

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Ian D. Stewart
On 2002.06.10 05:48 Anthony DeRobertis wrote: On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 03:46, Alvin Oga wrote: > > - and if the drives gonna fail... i say its more likely to die > within the first 30 days ... Yes. MTBF only measures how likely it is to fail during the middle of its life. A good number die early

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Ian D. Stewart
On 2002.06.10 03:35 Anthony DeRobertis wrote: On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:33, Alvin Oga wrote: > if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter > if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping ) No, it does matter. You can expect at least one of four 20GB drives to fail much sooner than one 80

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 03:46, Alvin Oga wrote: > > - and if the drives gonna fail... i say its more likely to die > within the first 30 days ... Yes. MTBF only measures how likely it is to fail during the middle of its life. A good number die early (defective) and late (worn out). Not many die

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Alvin Oga
hi ya anthony yes... good point on MTBF... - and if the drives gonna fail... i say its more likely to die within the first 30 days ... ( some disks more likely to die than others irrespective of the MTBF and name-brands.. - i have a pile of "bad/flaky IBM disks" ... about 1-

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-10 Thread Anthony DeRobertis
On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:33, Alvin Oga wrote: > if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter > if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping ) No, it does matter. You can expect at least one of four 20GB drives to fail much sooner than one 80GB drive, assuming same MTBF numbers on all driv

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-09 Thread Alvin Oga
hi ya fun stuff. it depends ... if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping ) - i rather worry about 1 large disk failure... than to worry about which of the 4 small disks gonna die ... also makes 4x the mess i

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-09 Thread Brian Dessent
"Ian D. Stewart" wrote: > As the size of IDE hard drives increase, what are the > advantages/disadvantages of using a single large hard drive as opposed > to a RAID stack (say, 80 GB hard drive vs. raid tower w/ 4 20 GB hard > drives) ? I'd say it all depends on the specs of hard drives. If you

Re: HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-09 Thread Dave Sherohman
On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 09:35:05AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote: > As the size of IDE hard drives increase, what are the > advantages/disadvantages of using a single large hard drive as opposed > to a RAID stack Well, that depends on what flavor of RAID you're talking about... In general: RAID

HDD vs. RAID (was Re: Lilo Q)

2002-06-09 Thread Ian D. Stewart
On 2002.06.08 22:33 Alice M. Pinard wrote: As I'm continuing to try and troubleshoot a hd that doesn't seem to want to boot (promise ultra card, 60g hd) I just wanna doublecheck one thing Semi-OT As the size of IDE hard drives increase, what are the advantages/disadvantages of using a single