On Oct 8, 2007, at 3:38 AM, Geoff Galitz wrote:

I would argue that the situation you describe is a result of  that
particular RAID adapter or that particular make and model is just
inappropriate (no offense)

None taken.

I should have been clearer on the point I was trying to make.

First the clarifications:

I never meant to imply that RAID is a backup substitute. Treating it as such is foolish in a production environment for many obvious reasons. I mentioned the backup issue here (it was a failure of the existing backup system, not a standard policy) to explain why the group in question had to go to such lengths to restore the data that was on the disks.

The main point that I was trying to make was the the proprietary nature of the HW raid controller that they used made recovery from a double disk failure a much more lengthy and expensive process than it would have been with the software implementation (in this specific case). For an inexpensive/small installation, I personally feel that software raid allows for better control and management of resources with a minimal (if any) performance hit.

That's all I really wanted to say.

-bill "Don't shoot me, I'm only the piano player" rankin


_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf@beowulf.org
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit 
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf

Reply via email to