BLU Discuss list archive

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

Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup

Subject: Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup
From: sethg at ropine.com (Seth Gordon)
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2007 12:05:07 -0500
In-reply-to: <6b2fb07e0702210820x7e1fd9e3l4c18492fc1021988@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b2fb07e0702210820x7e1fd9e3l4c18492fc1021988@mail.gmail.com>

BTW...

(1) I think RAID 5 (and up) is really only worth doing if (a) every hour
of downtime costs you real money or (b) you are exercising the drives
heavily enough that you can *expect* one of them to fail every few months.

(2) Whether or not you have RAID, you need backups.  (I speak from
experience....)

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

Follow-Ups:
- Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup
  - From: blu at vl.com (Tom Metro)

References:
- Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup
  - From: dougsweetser at gmail.com (Doug)

Prev by Date: Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup
Next by Date: sftp batch mode and interactive passwords
Previous by thread: Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup
Next by thread: Raid 5 versus 3 computer backup
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread


BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities.

Boston Linux & Unix / webmaster@blu.org