![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|||
| Welcome
to Tech Support Forum home to more then 136,000 problems solved. Issues
have included: Spyware, Malware, Virus Issues, Windows, Microsoft,
Linux, Networking, Security, Hardware, and Gaming Getting your
problem solved is as easy as: 1. Registering for a free account 2. Asking your question 3. Receiving an answer Registered members: * See fewer ads. * And much more..
|
| Want to know how to post a question? click here | Having problems with spyware and pop-ups? First Steps |
|
|||||||
| Hard Drive Support Support Forum for hard drives; Western Digital, Seagate, Maxtor, Toshiba |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Knysna, South Africa
Posts: 17
OS: XP Pro SP2
|
Raid Advice
Hi all. I would appreciate some input on a project I am planning.
I am in the process of setting up a server to better serve my clients backup and update requirements. I plan to use 5 x 250gig+ Seagate SATA drives and would like some input on which RAID array would be the most efficient as far as data safety is concerned along with the ease of replacing a crashed drive with a minimum of downtime. Any input would be welcome. |
|
|
|
| Important Information |
|
Join the #1 Tech Support Forum Today - It's Totally Free!
TechSupportForum.com is a leading support website for your computer needs. We offer free, friendly and personalized computer support. Why pay to have your computer fixed when you can do it for free. Join TechSupportforum.com Today - Click Here |
|
|
#2 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 4
OS: All Windows all the time
|
Re: Raid Advice
First, spend some time reading up on RAID levels
Here is a good start; http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/perf/...evels/tech.htm For maximum security and uptime, I personally recommend RAID 5 (this is the raid level used at every datacenter I have ever seen) you can make this more robust by going RAID 5+1. Unfortunatly, while RAID 5 can work with as few as 3 drives, for better efficiency, I would recommend 5 drives. 6 if you want to do 5+1 You will also want to go with a high-end dedicated RAID card...preferably something with dedicated onboard cache of at least 256mb or higher. Even better if the card has battery backup... While the other raids (1+0 will work) I don't recommend it except if redundancy is your only goal. Ed web/gadget guru |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Knysna, South Africa
Posts: 17
OS: XP Pro SP2
|
Re: Raid Advice
Thank you Ed, I will most certainly read a bit more on this subject. I had myself thought RAID 5 was the way to go but have read a few conflicting articles and was in need of some input to be in a more knowledgeable place before setting this system up.
Thanks again Brian |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 (permalink) |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: East Sussex, UK
Posts: 82
OS: Vista Home Premium 32-bit/Windows XP Pro SP2/Ubuntu 6.04
|
Re: Raid Advice
If you can have/afford it, consider building a server with hot-swap HDDs - if/when one of them dies, it's easier if you can swap a dead drive without having to shut the server down.
Other than that, I'd go for RAID 5+1 just as Ed said - you'll have speed and a mirror as a failback.
__________________
kraftwerk keeping local ict going |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|