DANGER!!! Problems with 10.04 installer (RAID devices *will* get corrupted)

Karl Larsen klarsen1 at gmail.com
Fri Apr 23 17:57:53 UTC 2010

On 04/23/2010 09:34 AM, CLIFFORD ILKAY wrote:
> On 04/23/2010 08:03 AM, Karl Larsen wrote:
>>            I will never use raid because I am not running a server. But
>> even if I was I would back up the server every night using cron. It is
>> the only thing to do if you have important data.  People on this list
>> have real pain when there hard drive fails (or the RAID5 system acts up)
>> and I feel their pain but it can be solved ONLY by a real back up.
> Doing backups would be the right thing to do because RAID is NOT a
> backup solution. It is a fault-tolerance and in some cases, a
> performance solution. With the right hardware and the right
> configuration, RAID enables your machine to continue working even after
> a drive, two in some configurations, fails and again with the same
> criteria, you can get better performance. That is essential for servers
> that must have high availability or special needs like having fast
> database read times. If you have a hot swap device, you can replace the
> defective drive without powering down and the RAID set will rebuild.
> Performance during the rebuild will be reduced but lower performance
> usually is better than being off-line. Before the dead drive in the RAID
> set has been replaced and during that rebuild process, you have a
> vulnerability window in most RAID configurations where failure of one
> more drive will break the RAID set. That's why it's important to have
> spare drives on hand to replace the failed drives as soon as possible.
> Someone mentioned using SATA drives for RAID. Beware. Many, perhaps
> most, of the consumer grade SATA drives aren't suitable for using in
> RAID. The drive manufacturers have made firmware changes that prevent
> them from being used in RAID configurations, apparently. Western
> Digital, for example, has their consumer drives, which have three year
> warranties, and their "professional" drives, which have five year
> warranties. The pro drives are at least double the cost of the consumer
> drives but they're RAID-certified and have different firmware. I have no
> idea what happens if you use a consumer drive in a RAID configuration.
> It might work but not optimally.
         I am using one SATA hard drive that is now 6 years old, about. 
It still works and I see no reason for it to fail. And it has the same, 
except the serial cable, working speed as my older IDE drives like on my 
portable 160GB device that I back this up onto.

      If the RAID device can't use SATA it is likely because the RAID 
device has 50 pin data cables!

73 Karl


	Karl F. Larsen, AKA K5DI
	Linux User
	#450462   http://counter.li.org.
         Key ID = 3951B48D

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list