On: Why RAID 5 stops working in 2009 (2007)

[topbanana]

I don't use any storage level redundancy at all. I found that misconfiguration (my fault, on two occasions) made it more unreliable that just a single disk. I rely on cloud backup, and I'll take the hit if/when I need to rebuild my machines

[fulafel → topbanana]

Raid is no replacement for backups in any case!

For most people it's better to make a nightly copy to other HD. Raid is for saving downtime on HD failures, doesn't save you from accidental rm -r, word processor corrupting your thesis, GPU driver crash corrupting your filesystem, box getting owned, etc.

[autokad → fulafel]

i think what he means is, down time isn't a big deal since recovering from back up is quick enough in his case. I never found raid 5 particularly helpful because: #1 hard disks tend to fail at the same time #2 systems fail to give warnings on bad disks ie everything is working, no red flashing lights, things go boom, restart, just kidding, lol you got 2 bad disks. #3 redundant servers > redundant disks for uptime #4 cloud

but thats just me and my use cases

edit: when i use raid, i use raid 10 or raid 0

[mprovost → fulafel]

This is why Time Machine was a much better solution for Apple to implement than their attempt to build ZFS into OSX.