No. When we suggested RAIDs had other uses - I mentioned for speed - you argued they had no reason to be used for that either.
You can't squirm out of this one. But then, I guess this is actually an apology.? :) On Sun, Sep 14, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tom Piwowar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I was reading the Wikipedia and thought to see what their article on RAID > might contribute to our recent discussion. It reads... > > "RAID is not a good alternative to backing up data. Data may become > damaged or destroyed without harm to the drive(s) on which it is stored. > For example, part of the data may be overwritten by a system malfunction; > a file may be damaged or deleted by user error or malice and not noticed > for days or weeks; and of course the entire array is at risk of > catastrophes such as theft, flood, and fire." > > Which is pretty close to what I was trying to get across. ************************************************************************* ** List info, subscription management, list rules, archives, privacy ** ** policy, calmness, a member map, and more at http://www.cguys.org/ ** *************************************************************************
