On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Chris Weisiger <cweisiger at bellsouth.net>wrote: > Im not so much concerned about the os not being on a raid system. I am > really concerned about my data, music, pictures,docs, etc. > True, the data is generally more important than the OS (or hardware - you can buy more). > I run a minimum os centos 5.9 install anyway so it would take long to > reload the os if i had to. > BUT do you _really_ want to reload the OS and have to tweak config files again? Especially if you do not have the OS on a raid volume, back at least /etc/ up nightly or weekly (whatever fits your scenario) so you have at least some config files to go off of. There's a fellow on the Gentoo Forums that has a signature that says: "Computer users fall into two groups:- those that do backups those that have never had a hard drive fail." You might be lucky, but you won't want to get caught if your luck to drys up! :) > > -----Original Message----- > From: John R Pierce > Sent: 3/5/2013 6:45 PM > To: centos at centos.org > Subject: Re: [CentOS] Software RAID complete drives or individual > partitions > > On 3/5/2013 4:27 PM, Mark LaPierre wrote: > > The question is why are you using raid at all? > > indeed. the primary justification for the "R" in RAID, Redundant, is > high availability. having the OS on a non-raid volume completely > violates this. RAID is most definitely NOT a substitute for backups. > > > -- > john r pierce 37N 122W > somewhere on the middle of the left coast > > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > _______________________________________________ > CentOS mailing list > CentOS at centos.org > http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos > -- ---~~.~~--- Mike // SilverTip257 //