Digital BW, The Print

Dana Myers writ:

> would *highly* recommend using at least a RAID 0 "mirror" for back-up
> purposes. With a single drive, any error results in lost data; the  
> chances
> of losing data are substantially less.


You've probably been raked over the coals enough times before I got  
to read this, but I'll reiterate: RAID 0 is a Really Bad Idea if one  
is relying heavily on that data on those two (or more) lashed- 
together drives. I recently had to come to the rescue of a client  
whose Dell tower crashed and burned in the middle of a project;  
pulling off the cover I found two HDs. He said he *thought* one drive  
was a backup, but after ten futile minutes attempting to boot, I go  
into diagnostic mode and see the dreaded words: RAID 0, followed by a  
fatal-error alert for the second HD.  "Absolut Toast", with a touch  
of bitters.

RAID 0 was probably cool when drive capacity was relatively small and  
pricey: with 1, 2, and 3TB disks "on the hoof" these days, it doesn't  
make much sense to me. RAID 1 makes more sense, but again, other than  
for backup capacity (I'll likely be switching the drives in my LaCie  
network drive from a pair of 500GB drives to a pair of 2 or 3TB  
drives), I don't quite see the need. (Your mileage, etc.)


- Barrett

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]