[CentOS] Software RAID complete drives or individual partitions

Wed Mar 6 13:04:57 UTC 2013
SilverTip257 <silvertip257 at gmail.com>

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  //