ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Best solution for HD and images



Paul wrote:
> I just wanted to note that RAID 0 is, in most cases,
> a bad idea.  The reason is that if you stripe your
> data across multiple disks and one fails, you
> lose all the data.

This is true - however most of us rely on one hard drive for *everything*.
 Striping across two drives gives you much greater speed with no significant
difference in reliability (and yes I know there's two devices involved).
 Personally I copy my data to CDR, and if the hard drive dies I'll have
to rebuild the OS from scratch.  There's better options, but the cost and
hassle isn't worth it for me.  I'd rather be running a two drive stripe
set and halve the time I sit around waiting to load and save 27MB film scans.

If you can afford the number of drives required to get to RAID 0/1 or 5,
go for it.

Rob

PS Can someone confirm for me that all this discussion of IDE RAID is irrelevent
to Mac users?  Are there IDE RAID solutions for Mac?



Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
http://wordweb.com






 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.