On Fri, 2011-09-02 at 12:03 -0700, Austin Godber wrote:
> Thank you for the clarification Craig, I am re-examining my storage
> strategy, thus my email. Sadly this machine has been in service a
> number of years and already contains more data than is possible in a
> RAID 10 configuration. If I had the spare space and resources I'd be
> thrilled to switch to RAID 10. That is not the case, however. Given
> that, I am faced with the choice between having the machine entirely
> unusable between now and when I can acquire a BBU or using it with the
> risk of data loss/corruption, I will chose the latter. Neither data
> loss nor corruption would go unnoticed in the period that this will be
> necessary.
>
>
> Does that sound entirely unreasonable?
----
reminds me of dialog in 'So I Married an Axe Murderer'...
Charlie: "For example, how many people have you brutally murdered?"
Harriet: "Brutal" is a very subjective word. What's brutal to one person
might be reasonable to somebody else."
I think SATA hard drives are so cheap nowadays, that it's hard to
justify choosing RAID 5 for more yield at the cost of performance and
reliability.
Craig
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.