[SOLVED] RAID or not?

suicidaleggroll · 07-24-2012, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BuckNekkid

I misunderstood that Raid supported 9 hard drives daiy-changed together, so a present day 2 tb drive would equal out to 18TB. Now this mistaken idea does not support 9 drives

Sure it does, it's just incredibly unsafe. What you're referring to is RAID 0, and running it with 9 drives is perfectly fine and will get you the single 18 TB array you're looking for. The problem is you're now 9 times more likely to lose a drive versus just having one drive by itself, and being RAID 0, if you lose that one drive, you lose the entire 18 TB array. The other RAID levels (5, 6, 10, etc) allow you to sacrifice some of that 18 TB in exchange for redundancy to protect you from single or multiple hard drive failures.

Devyn · 08-30-2012, 01:13 PM

It could be done safely enough like this guy did and with RAID6 as well with SSD type R/W's no less. Your size would be limited to the size of the disk with the least capacity however. Don't forget a good UPS to buffer some of the voltage fluctuations that can degrade your storage quicker over the years.

Regards,
DH

suicidaleggroll · 08-30-2012, 01:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Devyn

It could be done safely enough like this guy did and with RAID6 as well with SSD type R/W's no less. Your size would be limited to the size of the disk with the least capacity however.

That's RAID 6, not RAID 0.

Devyn · 08-30-2012, 05:12 PM

That's right.

Seeing RAID numbers tossed around from 0 to 6 what's really needed here would be better answered if we knew what's the storage amount now and how much has it grown over the past weeks, months etc. to justify 18TB.

At 3TB per disk, this solution is about $3000. At current drive prices prices an effective 12TB RAID 6 solution could fetch around $1500 without using hardware raid. My 2c....

Regards,
DH