Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- From: Per Jessen <per@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2008 11:23:02 +0100
Sandy Drobic wrote:
Per Jessen wrote:
It's a slightly different topic, but running complete backups are far
from always practical. The enormous amounts of disk-space and 24/7
production requirements make it virtually impossible to run complete
backups. Backups are a last resort for when disaster strikes.
On my new server (2.7 TB RAID) I use LVM snapshots and rsnapshot on
another disk as backup. Very fast and reliable.
Interesting, I may have to look into that. We currently run two storage
arrays back-to-back, but that's only realistic as long as we're still
on a SAN.
So, it is no longer theoretical; you need RAID both on the primary
AND backup hardware devices. That gives you the best fault
tolerance, both human and hardware.
What do you do about the risk of a dual-drive failure? RAID6 is one
possible answer, but AFAIK it requires at least 5 disks, which is too
many (for my situation).
At least 4 disks are required for RAID6.
Also very interesting - I'll have to look at that in detail. I really
thought 5 disks was the minimum.
--
/Per Jessen, Zürich
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- From: Amedee Van Gasse
- Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- References:
- [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- From: Per Jessen
- Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- From: Richard
- Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- From: Per Jessen
- Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- From: Sandy Drobic
- [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- Prev by Date: Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- Next by Date: Re: [opensuse] KDEs big mistake | Linux and Open Source | TechRepublic.com
- Previous by thread: Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- Next by thread: Re: [opensuse] bigger disks, bigger risks?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|