Wat the *** is raid? - Page 3 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > New Systems | Building and Buying
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 04-20-2006, 09:12 AM   #21 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Tuskatappaja's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Finland (Winland)
Posts: 163
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by apokalipse
how much greater?

I would only consider it a big risk if I was running something like a heavily used file server, and even then only if I was using not-so-good quality drives (for example, Maxtor)
if I could help it, I would have the server run on Seagate drives only, or maybe Western Digital.

I like my Seagate drives, I have 3 of them, and I have had no problems at all with them.
in fact, Seagate have the lowest failure rate, followed by Western Digital.

man, I must sound like I work for Seagate
Im not sure how much greater, like I said im poor in math, lol.

Seagate is indeed a good choice, I myself favor WD but have nothing bad to say about Seagate.

Did you know that Seagate bought Maxtor, Im dreadfully waiting the new line of Seagate drives
__________________

__________________
\"Lähimmäisenrakkaus on huoraamista!\"
Tuskatappaja is offline  
Old 04-20-2006, 01:00 PM   #22 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
MrCoffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,858
Default

well its quite obvious really, say for example disk A has a 10% failure rate over 5 years but then you RAID 0 that disk with an identical one B, Your new failure rate becomes 20% over 5 years.

I.e. there is a 20% chance one of your disks will fail and you will lose all your data as opposed to 10%.
Those are just hypothetical figures of course.
__________________

__________________
Intel core I7 920
GA-EX58-UD3R
6GB OCZ platinum 1600
XFX HD4890
Noctua nh-u12p
Corsair HX520
Antec 300
Samsung 1TB F1 Spinpoint
Samsung SM2443BW 24"
MrCoffee is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 05:23 AM   #23 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
alexsabree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1,845
Default

wow... this is too hard.. and takes to much time.... and is unsafe.
That answers my question

In my opinion, raid is a waste of time

Unless u have to have the small increase (or whatever u gain)
alexsabree is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 07:29 AM   #24 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
MrCoffee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 1,858
Default

RAID has its uses but your average joe needn't bother with it.
__________________
Intel core I7 920
GA-EX58-UD3R
6GB OCZ platinum 1600
XFX HD4890
Noctua nh-u12p
Corsair HX520
Antec 300
Samsung 1TB F1 Spinpoint
Samsung SM2443BW 24"
MrCoffee is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 01:43 PM   #25 (permalink)
Lord Techie
 
Nitestick's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: смерти для спаме
Posts: 8,473
Default

Quote:
The correct one is "Redundant Array of Independent Disks." Because technically, any raid can have very expensive disks if you'd like.
no....like MrCoffee said the terms are interchangeable, they are both correct. and in my opinion Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks fits better since the inclusion of RAID level 0 as it really is not an independant disk system (why many people say it is not truly RAID). however the reason the term inexpensive applies is because it is relatively cheap. e.g 2x250gb hdd's vs 1x500gb hdd.
Nitestick is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 01:59 PM   #26 (permalink)
Ste
Do not Stare at my Avatar
 
Ste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Upon Gleaning Infinity
Posts: 9,577
Send a message via MSN to Ste
Default

Only RAID 0 Is unsafe, but it shouldn't matter if you keep back ups. Like you should anyways. There are alot of other RAIDS Also.

Search for it on wikipedia and youll see.
Ste is offline  
Old 04-21-2006, 10:02 PM   #27 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,130
Default Re: Wat the *** is raid?

Quote:
Originally posted by alexsabree
I always see people saying " this mobo has raid0 and stuff"

Wat the *** is all this raid stuff?

I dont understand a thing on teh subject.
i believe fkuc is spelt with 4 stars **** not ***
john3 is offline  
Old 04-22-2006, 04:08 AM   #28 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
alexsabree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: United States
Posts: 1,845
Default

i meant h*ll

not fkuc... but thats off topic
alexsabree is offline  
Old 04-22-2006, 08:58 AM   #29 (permalink)
Newb Techie
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 6
Default RAID

RAID stands for Redundant Array of Independant Disks.

I think that it's pointless. If you do

0- You have a chance of losing your hard drive
1-You waste a hard drive
0+1- You're wasting FOUR drives!


_________________________

AMD Athlon 64 X2 4800+
ATX Xion Solaris Case w/ 650 wtt. Power Supply
HP LightScribe 16x Dual-Layer +/- DVD burner
LG 16x DVD-ROM
19" ViewSonic LCD monitor
Creative X-Fi PRO sound card
7.1 channel speakers
MSI Micro-Star Neo2 KX480 motherboard
ATI All-In-One PCI Express Video Card
2048 MB Crucial Ballistic Memory
300 GB SATA150 hard drive (partioned in two)

MAC OS X tiger running on one partition (PearPC)

Windows Media Center Edition 2005 on the other
thephamtom123 is offline  
Old 04-22-2006, 10:33 AM   #30 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 3,479
Default

i still don't understand how can harddrive fails with RAID0
how can files get lost by itself with RAID 0? and why?

sorry for my stupid question but i really don't know any thing about RAID
__________________

maroon1 is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.