Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Storage

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 08:36 AM
JD's Avatar
JD JD is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 6,927

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The MAX View Post
is != supposed to be a "not equal" sign?
That's what it means.

Sure RAID isn't the most ideal backup, but it still helps IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 08:56 AM
dataxpert's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chertsey , 60km north of Montreal
Posts: 366
Default

Raid 1 make it more friendlily for recover of a mechanical failure, just replace the drive and voila..... But it’s not a back-up….. Honestly I see more often HD failure, than other thing ….. so raid1 is a good thing to have, combine with an external HD.

Personally I use raid 1 ( if not 5) in all my computer I have important stuff , and I have scheduled backup, in my Ubuntu backup server, in my garage… so if the house pass on fire….. When I download software than I pay, I also burn it on a DVD.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 12:57 PM
MVP
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 439
Default

HDDs (in my experience) don't tend to go as often as cheap RAID solutions.

RAID1 will protect you all day long from a drive dying, but how about your controller deciding to blow it's brains out? What then?
Trust me. I've had it happen a few times.


And yes, != means does not equal
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 01:35 PM
LionRed's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dargaville, New Zealand
Posts: 471
Default

IF a drive dies in a raid 1...or controller. Can't you take a drive hook it up as a normal stand alone drive...windows will say this drives needs a scandisk. Fix whatever...and the drive is viewable in windows?

I swear this happened in a RAID10 and I was pleasantly surprised to get my data back.
__________________
They say you can tell how rich a man's life has been, by how many dogs he has had in it.

RIP Kiwi - Oct 19th/05 - April 18th/11, you will always be our puppy!
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 01:44 PM
dataxpert's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chertsey , 60km north of Montreal
Posts: 366
Default

In the situation of the OP, it"s the motherboard that will died.... no problem for the drive all the data still their. Since I always install the OS in a diferent drive, it"s not a big, deal, change the mtb inform the raid bios about the drive , reinstall windows, an it's done.. in the case of the OP, he change the board and reinstall windows, or adjust the drivers ( if he can't find the same board ,)


Quote:
Originally Posted by death_hawk View Post
HDDs (in my experience) don't tend to go as often as cheap RAID solutions.

RAID1 will protect you all day long from a drive dying, but how about your controller deciding to blow it's brains out? What then?
Trust me. I've had it happen a few times.


And yes, != means does not equal

Last edited by dataxpert; May 8, 2009 at 02:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 01:52 PM
LionRed's Avatar
MVP
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Dargaville, New Zealand
Posts: 471
Default

I've swapped a couple MB's with raid's (in the past few months)and they didn't complain about it. From what I understand...it is becoming less of an issue with newer MB chip sets being backwards compatible with older Intel Raid chip sets. This was even going from a 2yr old Asus to a current Giga-Byte MB.

But as is the case with computers.....something always pops up.
__________________
They say you can tell how rich a man's life has been, by how many dogs he has had in it.

RIP Kiwi - Oct 19th/05 - April 18th/11, you will always be our puppy!
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old May 8, 2009, 02:30 PM
dataxpert's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chertsey , 60km north of Montreal
Posts: 366
Default

that's it data in raid 1 are not safe from operator mistake and virus, but they are ( at some extend ) from HD failure. I said I reinstall the OS, someone can of course just swap the MTB and just adjust for the drivers. A raid disk is a raid disk, the controler don't need to be compatible.....


I don't know why some people are allergic to Raid 1 ( it's means 2 disk in miror with the same data, we are not talking about raid 0 ) ... may be it does not make the computer more safe in every situation, but it does not make it worst.. no if someone can not retrieve data from a controller failure, he just have to call someone who know…. Or ask here…


Quote:
Originally Posted by LionRed View Post
I've swapped a couple MB's with raid's (in the past few months)and they didn't complain about it. From what I understand...it is becoming less of an issue with newer MB chip sets being backwards compatible with older Intel Raid chip sets. This was even going from a 2yr old Asus to a current Giga-Byte MB.

But as is the case with computers.....something always pops up.

Last edited by dataxpert; May 8, 2009 at 02:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
drives for raid, question Jim Storage 4 January 30, 2009 07:54 AM
RAID Question Wein13 Storage 7 October 12, 2008 06:15 AM
RAID question miggs78 Storage 17 August 30, 2008 03:12 AM
ESata dual raid enclosure = poor man's hardware raid? sswilson Storage 10 May 6, 2008 09:58 AM
raid controller question.... rob123 Storage 2 November 13, 2007 12:14 AM