This can be simultaneous failures or during a rebuild another drive can fail and the system will still be operational. It is a very fast setup with redundancy built in and requires a minimum of 4 drives to be operational. Want to learn how to improve your media management practices? Click below to speak with an expert today! ProMAX vs. Any info would be a great help.
This would be a lot more simple with a Linux system, because it has much better facilities for accessing drives other than as filesystems. Ask around your circle for someone who has Linux knowledge. Whatever you do, do not put the drives into a hardware RAID device and install them as a striped pair.
The RAID controller is likely to overwrite some of the data on the disks, as soon as you do this. I was amused when this popped up on Google. You do have a point that for completeness both versions should be included, so I updated the page.
Thanks for the feedback! This was useful since at the time hard drives were VERY expensive, especially as size increased. It was cheaper to create a large RAID array inexpensive of disks than it was to purchase a single drive with the same capacity.
I would like to find some documents on what each RAID configuration would need as a minimum from the server it is running on. It worked for documents, but not for large or small amounts of data needed to be drawn.
Its hardware was very subpar, and although it makes a big deal of being a quad-core, its limit was mhz, which is not as fast as current high level cell phones. The tech who set it up could not see how a RAID 5 could slow it down, I just wanted to eliminate redundancy altogether except for my manual but effective backups at night and lunch. In my effort to procure money from my manager I rebuilt our old server with new cooling and clean install, as well as RAM improvement to 3.
The D-link would render my mock up map in seconds, the old server took 7 seconds. This D-Link should only be used for homes or documents. Large datasets are useless, write speeds are terrible, as are read.
It was a nightmare. And the fact that the old 32 bit with an unreal amount of use was made to look like a giant rack system comparatively was not enough to get any money for a new server. A City Planner has not enough skill to set up a monitor, jerk move on my part, but deserved. Amazed to find City Planners have no mathematical skills, coming from Engineering I assumed they were similar.
Point is, Planners are useless managers and have no skills. And I could go on! Raid systems are to protect data and that is given! How one likes to protect data is decided on the conditions and requirements. To make it short; to be secure at home, get a cloud storage which is slow but very safe as the large service providers take this very seriously but it is a bit expensive or buy a back up drive from Western Digital, Seagate etc.
In my case, I want my data access to be fast, failsafe and accessible from anywhere in the world! What do I do?! I get a raid system like Raid 5 or 6 with 6 drive bays, a back up system to automatically back it up and get a service provider to have them connected to internet like it is in the cloud but actually it is a private cloud. One can also have a cloud storage lage enoufh to replicate the data at home which is stripped with parity and backed up. It sounds like overkill? What is parity?
It is the end result of calculation of data written on a disk as in 1s and zeros. The result is also in 1s and zeros. You write the result in the parity section which is also distributed so that it also has parity information.
It took us haf a day in class some 20 years ago to understand and learn but you do not have to go through that. Imagine there are 5 disks. Data you lost on a drive is missing but like a puzzle, you have all the surrounding lines that are continuing at the other side of the missing piece.
You also have the colours. More, less, this is the idea. This is a nice write up, but missing some basic logic. Other than that, it has the best performance and redundancy of all RAID levels. I currently have 11TB of [ictues on a 12 TB drive. Is there another Raid configuration that is better for capacity and redundancy, plus speed? I have an array of 12x12TB drives. I created a RAID 6 across all 12 and then created one partition and am using an xfs file system.
I am getting about 1. Thank you. RAID 1: Not sure. If yes that what is procedure. If RAID 5 is configured it will take time for rebuild data. Simply like RAID Raid50 is a strip of groups of RAID5. They say better write performance and increase data protection.. So if you have 9 HDs, create 3 cells of RAID5, meaning you can have 3 simultaneous fail providing no more 1 fail in each group.
My data can be split two parts: raw data like compressed video and document files and in-process data like the data extracted from the compressed ones and need to be processed further. Hi, I am setting up a large array for a surveillance system. I have spoken to some people about the size of hard drives available. Given that the MTBF is the same for the drives, the lower number of drives has a lower potential for a failure. The more drives you have, the more likely a failure.
This ends up without a parody Drive involved which means a failure of one of any of the discs would result in the loss of all data in the raid array. RAID 1 offers complete redundancy. With 2 drives, it will mirror all data to the other drive, with 3 drives, it will mirror to both the other drives.
It will continue like that for as many drives as you put in. Your space will be limited to your smallest drive in the RAID 1, no matter how many drives you have.
Chances of losing data in a RAID 1 get increasingly lower the more drives you have, but it also makes it very expensive per GB. Hope that helps. I would like to know if it is possible somehow to install Windows 10 on Raid 0? If so, how would I proceed? When prompted, you would then insert the disk with the driver on it.
Most RAID manufacturers have an option to create the driver disk. However, if you have a HDD Raid controller card, or a raid controller built into your bios, then you can create the raid there.
Then using the Drivers for the controller, you can install Windows.. Anyway, I think the dual drives in the enclosure are fine but power suddenly just cut off. My question is this: Can I take out the platters and put them in a dual dock 3.
Or is there a way to repair the power issue in the enclosure? It fired right up perfectly. Daniel Smith 4 drives of 3 Tb in raid 10 is 6 TB because the you combine 2 drives as raid 0 and the other 2 are used a mirror Those who work with large amounts of data should choose between raid 10 or 6 In my view today raid 5 is no longer a good solution because of bitrot.. However the most secure is in my view raid 6 till the grow beyond the max of raid 6 is reached and it looses its ability to proper restore the files.
Raid10 Am I right to be scared of mirroring? Is Raid10 failure along similar lines possible? Even a software raid should be telling you which drive is malfunctioning — at least Linux will flood error log with messages of failed drive. If you have 4 separate raid 5 arrays, would a hard drive failure in one of the arrays affect only the performance of the one array and the others would remain unaffected? Can anyone explain this? You have a file that is broken into 10 chunks, and those chunks must load into memory before you can use them.
So on one dish, your hard drive controller loads block 1, then block 2, then block 3… etc. In raid 0, it would load block 1 and 2 at the same time, then block 3 and 4. But if you lose a disk, you only have half your file. What you are recommending will not increase speeds by much, unless you are loading to files in separate folders. Thanks for beautifully explaining the types of RAID. I am a tech guy and was using RAID 5. Somehow, I had lost the data from it.
So, I asked the solution from my colleague and he advised me to use Stellar Phoenix raid recovery software. This works great for me. Striping does not, however, provide redundancy to protect information, which is why it is designated 0. Combining these two storage levels makes RAID 10 fast and resilient at the same time.
If you need hardware-level protection for your data and faster storage performance, RAID 10 is a simple, relatively inexpensive fix. RAID 10 is secure because mirroring duplicates all your data. It's fast because the data is striped across multiple disks; chunks of data can be read and written to different disks simultaneously. To implement RAID 10, you need at least four physical hard drives. You also need a disk controller that supports RAID.
Here's one important caveat about RAID and backup. Although RAID writes data to two disks simultaneously, it is not a backup. If your operating system or software, rather than the hard disk, corrupts your data, this corrupted data is sent to both disks and simultaneously corrupts both drives. It's up to the RAID card to have the option Feeling good about this haha.
Ok, nothing new haha. This gives me a logical drive of GB roughly which would be equal to three of those drives 73GB each, so i think this is correct Ok, I'm pretty sure i understand the mechanics of it Here's my dilema, with a bit of a backstory.. If I select 3 drives for arry 1, and 3 for array 2, I get the option to span them.. If I select 2 drives for array 1, 2 for array 2, and 2 for array 3, I am presented with the option to span all three creating a logical drive, with the option only for RAID 1 and a total size of MB.
The logical drives must have the same stripe size. Raid 10 is a total of four drives. Each pair spans, and then a mirror is built of the span or vice versa depending on the controller card. Your best bet with 6 drives is to have a 4 drive raid 10 and then set the other two as hot spares so that if you lose any it will immediately swap in.
Ahh, I see. Hmm, the only downfall of that route would be I am losing 73GB of space then to having 2 hot spares. I don't see the need for more than that for email, but my users have a way of NEVER deleting anything. So basically if I go the other route, having 3 arrays at RAID 1 and then spanned, I have a higher risk of total meltdown if i start losing drives compared to having 2 arrays and 2 hot swaps You have an old controller.
I would go ahead with the hot swap option Sosipater suggested. Thanks everyone!!!
0コメント