Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2004 16:05:12 -0800 From: Gianluca <gianluca@gmail.com> To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: drive failure during rebuild causes page fault Message-ID: <a9ef272704121516055fae24b5@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <6.1.2.0.2.20041215183830.030013b0@mail.rfnj.org> References: <20041213052628.GB78120@meer.net> <20041213054159.GC78120@meer.net> <20041213060549.GE78120@meer.net> <20041213192119.GB4781@meer.net> <41BE8F2D.8000407@DeepCore.dk> <a9ef27270412151516fcc7720@mail.gmail.com> <6.1.2.0.2.20041215183830.030013b0@mail.rfnj.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> If you're thinking of using RAID instead of good timely backups, you need
> to go back to the drawing board, because that is not what RAID is intended
> to replace -- and is something it cannot replace.
actually all the data I plan to keep on that server is gonna be backed
up, either to cdr/dvdr or in the original audio cds that I still have.
what I meant by integrity is trying to avoid having to go back to the
backups to restore 120G (or more in this case) that were on a dead
drive. I've done that before, and even if it's no mission-critical
data, it remains a huge PITA :)
thanks for the detailed explanation of how RAID5 works, somehow I
didn't really catch the distinction between the normal and degraded
operations on the array.
what would be your recommendations for this particular (and very
limited) application?
thanks a lot for your help,
g.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?a9ef272704121516055fae24b5>