I would offer some comments about using desktop RAID systems, which have be=
en mentioned in this thread.
When RAID arrays are used in Storage Area Networks or other such configurat=
ions in professional datacenters, *everything* is redundant -- the servers,=
the disk storage, power supplies, RAID controllers, and the interconnectio=
ns between server and disk. In a desktop RAID unit, typically it is only th=
e disk drives themselves which are protected. And, while a disk is the par=
t most likely to fail, other failures can occur as well.
I was reminded of these limitations the hard way a couple years ago when I =
had a desktop RAID unit fail, apparently (I'll never know for sure) due to =
a failed controller board in the box. The device was (just) out of warrant=
y, the manufacturer (a major well-known firm) would not offer any servicing=
, and their only suggestion was to buy another identical unit, transfer the=
drives, and see if the data was intact. I did a fair bit of exploration a=
nd could not find any third-party who had the expertise to service the unit=
, which became an expensive scrap job.
I was backed up separately, so my data was protected, but out of curiosity =
I contacted one of the best known firms in the UK for a quote on data resto=
ration, and the answer was =A33000 to give it a try with no guarantee of su=
ccess. This may sound crazy but is understandable given the complexity of =
how data is distributed across drives in the various RAID strategies, and t=
he fact that the data may or may not have been corrupted.
These desktop RAID units may still be attractive to some in offering a degr=
ee of real-time protection against a drive failure, but in my own setup (us=
ed primarily for photography) I have concluded this benefit isn't worth the=
expense and complexity. I have moved to a simpler system with 4 identical=
large-capacity drives, 3 of which are onsite and 1 of which is always offs=
ite. Every day (twice a day if I am doing a lot of work) the primary drive=
gets backed up to each of the 2 other onsite drives, and as often as is pr=
actical one is swapped with the offsite device, to keep the data protected =
from fire or burglary as up-to-date as possible. In this setup, I may lose =
a few hours of work if a drive fails, but on the other hand the system is i=
nstantly restorable and the cost of replacing the failed unit is much lower=
.
Not to state what may be obvious, but if you choose to use one of these uni=
ts notwithstanding, it is important to remember it is not a backup device. =
RAID offers real-time protection against a drive failure, but an accidenta=
lly-deleted file will be deleted across the RAID array, and any software-ge=
nerated file corruption likewise may be duplicated in each 'copy' of the fi=
le. So even if you employ one of these units to protect your work intra-da=
y, you still need to back up to separate devices regularly.
Kin
--- In "sounds.images" <=
> wrote:
>
>
> Many thanks everyone for you words of support and replies, a new laptop h=
as been ordered and I do have a caddy already, so will put it in ther and h=
ave a go at transferring it of it is possible to recover them..
>
> Seen in PC world.co.uk is a USB 3.0 1tb external drive for =A359.00 so ma=
y grab one..
>
> Will update as soon as I can.
>
> Simon
>
>
>
>
> --- In "sounds.images" <sounds.images@>=
wrote:
> >
> > Last night the other half shut down the laptop as normal before bed. Th=
is morning it was dead. It would power on and fans would spin but nothing. =
Took it to my parents and tried their hard drive in my machine.... Nothing.=
.
> >
> > Tried my hd on their machine and it tried to boot but went straight to =
blue screen of death twice...
> >
> > So never put off your back ups. I have lost every recording I made sinc=
e September. It was on the cards to do this little job this weekend, but it=
is too late.. Will try again when I get a replacement machine. This was co=
mpletely unforeseen..
> >
> > Oh well... Lesson learned. Never put off the most important job of all.
> >
> > Simon.
> >
>
|