Hi Kin,
I agree that there is still the element of the RAID server that can fail an=
d in your case it has happened, so apparently it is not unlikely. So I real=
ly like your solution/approach. Am I assuming correctly that you use one dr=
ive that always stays the primary and that then gets backed up to the two o=
ther external drives? If so, what software are you using to perform this fe=
at or do you do it manually? I would be very interested to hear your feedba=
ck as although I am still confident in my RAID, it has the limitation that =
it is slowed down by its only I/O connection - a 1GBit Ethernet connection.=
So I was eyeing a USB3 RAID solution using 2 or 3 standard external HDD an=
d SoftRAID 4.5 (Mac), however, I am wondering whether your solution offers =
any benefits over a software RAID?
For anyone who is not that familiar with RAID systems, there are different =
types of RAID. What we need for data protection/safety is RAID 1, a 'Mirror=
ed Set'. This can be 2 or 3 even 4 drives and they all hold the same mirror=
ed data. So always check the specifications because there are many RAID sol=
utions out there that offer RAID 0, which makes data transfer super fast bu=
t does not offer protection against data loss. So if you are in the market,=
look for RAID 1.
Cheers,
Eric
On 03/04/2013, at 7:49 PM, Kin Corning <> wrote:
> I would offer some comments about using desktop RAID systems, which have =
been mentioned in this thread.
>
> When RAID arrays are used in Storage Area Networks or other such configur=
ations in professional datacenters, *everything* is redundant -- the server=
s, the disk storage, power supplies, RAID controllers, and the interconnect=
ions between server and disk. In a desktop RAID unit, typically it is only =
the disk drives themselves which are protected. And, while a disk is the pa=
rt 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 t=
o a failed controller board in the box. The device was (just) out of warran=
ty, the manufacturer (a major well-known firm) would not offer any servicin=
g, and their only suggestion was to buy another identical unit, transfer th=
e 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 curiosit=
y I contacted one of the best known firms in the UK for a quote on data res=
toration, and the answer was =A33000 to give it a try with no guarantee of =
success. This may sound crazy but is understandable given the complexity of=
how data is distributed across drives in the various RAID strategies, and =
the fact that the data may or may not have been corrupted.
>
> These desktop RAID units may still be attractive to some in offering a de=
gree of real-time protection against a drive failure, but in my own setup (=
used primarily for photography) I have concluded this benefit isn't worth t=
he expense and complexity. I have moved to a simpler system with 4 identica=
l large-capacity drives, 3 of which are onsite and 1 of which is always off=
site. 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 u=
nits notwithstanding, it is important to remember it is not a backup device=
. RAID offers real-time protection against a drive failure, but an accident=
ally-deleted file will be deleted across the RAID array, and any software-g=
enerated file corruption likewise may be duplicated in each 'copy' of the f=
ile. 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=
has been ordered and I do have a caddy already, so will put it in ther and=
have 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 =
may 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. =
This 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.... Nothin=
g..
> > >
> > > Tried my hd on their machine and it tried to boot but went straight t=
o blue screen of death twice...
> > >
> > > So never put off your back ups. I have lost every recording I made si=
nce 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 =
completely unforeseen..
> > >
> > > Oh well... Lesson learned. Never put off the most important job of al=
l.
> > >
> > > Simon.
> > >
> >
>
>
|