Raid

Just curious if anyone is using Raid 1 configuration for redundancy.

I'm guessing that you're already backing up your files somewhere. At least one backup. For someone in this line of work, in my opinion you should have at a minimum:

• 1 HD copy for original files
• 1 HD backup (external drive)
• 1 offsite storage (or cloud)

Anything less, and you're just begging to be bitten in the ass.

More than anything else, RAID is designed to maximize up-time. RAID shortens recovery time if one of your drives burns out on you, it's not a viable backup solution. If you can afford the time to recover lost files from your backup (or the time to re-install all your software in the event of a main drive failure), you don't need RAID. In most cases, RAID is just overkill for home users. Additionally, RAID controllers are prone to failure. Unless you're a networking guru, this will cause more problems than it will fix.

Ultimately, why are you considering RAID?

Anthony, appreciate your input but you need to read up on Raid 1, many modern MB's support it and with Raid 1 the second drive is a mirror (redundant) of the first, don't understand you comment on reliability, almost all servers use it. I was just wondering if anyone was using it.

Seems like a good alternative with 1 TB drives under a hundred bucks.

I agree with yibel. Raid drives are the way to go if you can afford the original setup. We use many of the at work for video servers and they are very stable.

I use a Raid 0 configured 15k SAS drives in my home computer, but that's built for speed more than anything. Is it overkill? Yes, its rare for anyone to run SAS drives in a home computer, but they're fast as hell. lol

I'm with Anthony here on Raid 1 as a backup solution though. With it you won't have recovery from accidental deletion (because everything is mirrored immediately), system/virus corruption, physical damage to the computer, theft, power surge etc. The only thing R1 would be good for is if one drive has a hardware failure. However, if a drive does fail, then you don't have a backup anymore until you rebuild the array.

If you do use Raid 1 definitely do not put the OS on it.

I would use the spare drive in a usb enclosure and setup a backup program.

Yibel said:

Anthony, appreciate your input but you need to read up on Raid 1, many modern MB's support it and with Raid 1 the second drive is a mirror (redundant) of the first, don't understand you comment on reliability, almost all servers use it. I was just wondering if anyone was using it.

Seems like a good alternative with 1 TB drives under a hundred bucks.

Click to expand...

Raid controllers seem just as reliable as any other hardware, imo. I've had more hard drives fail than anything. For servers Raid is used for a different purpose though (and is usually completely different hardware). Most servers, including mine, still have offsite and separate backup drives.

I think the best solution would be Raid 1 w/ another external drive.

My current backup is an external (now multiple) with the money shots also on dvd. The amount of data and storage just continues to grow. Was thinking of building a new workstation and was exploring different options.

I'm very well-read on RAID configurations, incidentally. Not really sure what in my reply was questionable?

RAID 1 is more about read speed/performance and redundancy than as a storage solution was the only point I was trying to make. It's typically used for important financial computing, small databases, and enterprise servers. It's not really a setup that would be advantageous to the workflow of a photographer. Which is why I asked what you would use it for. In case it was something different, there may be a better solution. Unless you're going with a high end system, you're going to take a performance hit in a RAID 1 configuration, as all data is immediately written twice.

Sorry I brought it up.

Anthony Hereld said:

RAID 1 is more about read speed/performance and redundancy than as a storage solution was the only point I was trying to make...

Click to expand...

eh, I wouldn't say speed. RAID 10 is about speed/redundancy But of course you wouldn't have that type of array in a home computer.

Yibel said:

Sorry I brought it up.

Click to expand...

I don't think Anthony meant his response to be as abrasive as it sounds.

jdeg said:

I don't think Anthony meant his response to be as abrasive as it sounds.

Click to expand...

No, I really didn't. This seems to be an ongoing issue. From now on I will include hearts and rainbows with all of my replies. Or maybe a disclaimer...because hearts and rainbows suck.

Anthony Hereld said:

No, I really didn't. This seems to be an ongoing issue. From now on I will include hearts and rainbows with all of my replies. Or maybe a disclaimer...because hearts and rainbows suck.

Click to expand...

I'll add hearts and rainbow icons just for you. lol

I've found that either Black Flag or a really flat rock work better than Raid!

Of course your mileage may vary.

Carolina Photo Guy said:

I've found that either Black Flag or a really flat rock work better than Raid!

Of course your mileage may vary.

Click to expand...

With the rock there is never a doubt as to it working or not, indoors black flag has always been my favorite.

FWIW... I use a RAID1 configuration on my FreeNas server. I have two 3TB drives mirroring each other. As some have pointed out, RAID arrays are only part of the puzzle as far as a comprehensive disaster recovery plan is concerned. If I ever need more than 3TB of storage then I'll break the mirror and use a RAID0.

It really depends on what the end user is looking for.

<<insert hearts and rainbows here>>

PapaST said:

<<insert hearts and rainbows here>>

Click to expand...

The boss is slacking. I'm still waiting for my icons.

Anthony Hereld said:

The boss is slacking. I'm still waiting for my icons.

Click to expand...

Like these? <8 :rainbow: