> I think we should scale this back to the parameters of the original > question: given a limited budget and the need to protect about 1TB, > which of these technologies make sense? I woule go for DVDs *and* an external > hard drive, but no RAID.
RAID vs. single drive boils down to the following formula: RAID: Multiple points of failure, with fault-tolerance for drive components. How much depends on the array. Single drive: 2 points of failure: the drive controller and the drive. No fault-tolerance. Not to beat a dead horse, but I've had too numerous to remember drive failures, one RAID controller failure and multiple non-RAID motherboard failures, which effectively kills the drive controller, since nearly all are integrated. RAID is a no-brainer for me; my business depends upon the low cost high-availability it gives me. Redundant fail-over servers would be very, very nice, but it breaks the bank. RAID will be around for a very long time to come. Reports of its death are greatly exaggerated. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
