11 Oct
2004
11 Oct
'04
11:38 p.m.
On 12/10/2004, at 11:19 AM, Jay West wrote:
Everyone who is talking about "software raid is
ok because I've used
it without trouble"... that's a pretty insufficient argument. Kinda
like someone saying "Oh, you can format double density floppies to
single density and it works great because I did it". B.S. - a little
education and you'd see why it's precarious. I've seen people who
argue about that because they have "proof it works fine". Just wait
till a few months go by and their data doesn't appear anymore :) Not
that software raid doesn't work, it does, and quite well. But all I'm
saying is a better argument might sway me. That one doesn't.
Well this is only one data point :-) but I've been using software RAID
on production servers for at least 15 years (and maybe a little longer)
and I have _never_ lost data due to software failures.
Of course, this software raid is called VMS Volume Shadowing.....
In theory, software RAID1 could be better than hardware RAID as the
operating system has a better knowledge of what's happening (and about
to happen) whereas the hardware just "duplicates blocks". I'd also want
to be absolutely sure that in all circumstances that should the
hardware controller fail that I still get data off (and on) without
needing another RAID controller.
Huw Davies | e-mail: Huw.Davies(a)kerberos.davies.net.au
Melbourne | "If soccer was meant to be played in the
Australia | air, the sky would be painted green"