Yes, but in this day and age when motherboards already have sata raid controllers on them, it is only a case of buying one more harddrive and setting it up for raid-1. Cost is less than $100 usually. Of course I am a lover of scsi raid-5, and probably will finally implement it on my PC soon since I have everything but the drives and I can now get 73gig surplus drives for very little money (they only kind of money the government allows me to have these days).
-graywolf Bob Sullivan wrote: > Graywolf, > We'll use RAID on servers where we have big files stored and where we > want to read the data quickly, something like reading demographics > across 8,000,000 census tracks in the USA and doing manipulations with > the info. > Regards, Bob S. > > On 4/22/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> The purpose of RAID 1 or 5 is to have redundant copies of the data. In a >> properly setup redundant array a failed drive is simply replaced and it >> is restored from the other drives. You can actually set up a RAID system >> where this is done totally automatically (RAID 5 with a hot spare drive) >> but most of us home users will be comfortable with shutting down the >> system swapping out the bad drive and then letting it restore itself on >> boot up. There is an intermediate system with hot swappable drives but >> it tends to be more expensive to set up than the hot spare system these >> days. >> >> -graywolf >> >> AlexG wrote: >>> Presumably so they aren't spinning for nothing, assuming they won't >>> power down on thier own. >>> >>> MTBF for hard disks is reported to be greatly exagerated >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> [email protected] >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
