Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 12:05:36 -0700 From: Scott Blachowicz <scott@statsci.com> To: Chris Stenton <jacs@gnome.co.uk> Cc: hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Micropolis 1991 AV 9GB Drive Message-ID: <m0u7oA5-000r3uC@main.statsci.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 11 Apr 1996 17:59:20 %2B0100." <jacs-9603111659.AA00015122@hawk.gnome.co.uk>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Chris Stenton <jacs@gnome.co.uk> wrote:
> Is there a better 9GB drive I should be going for ... any advice would
> be appreciated.
I'd go for multiple smaller drives...we've had a 9Gb drive fail on us - losing
that much disk space all at once is a pain. We managed to find various chunks
of free space on other drives on our network, then restored 9Gb from backups,
then played some magic tricks with amd maps to get things back to "normal"
until we could get replacement disk space.
Going with multiple drives has advantages of reducing your grief if a drive
crashes (seems chances of multiple drives going at the same time ought to be
less than the chance of a single drive going). It also gives you multiple
spindles to be getting data off from at the same time (I would think that would
make aggregate performance better). Of course, this is all anecdotal, heresay,
"it makes sense to me" information without any hard benchmark data to back it
up...
Scott Blachowicz Ph: 206/283-8802x240 Mathsoft (Data Analysis Products Div)
1700 Westlake Ave N #500
scott@statsci.com Seattle, WA USA 98109
Scott.Blachowicz@seaslug.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?m0u7oA5-000r3uC>