Hi, On Mittwoch, 7. August 2013, Nigel Barker wrote: > > *do not* do this, if any of your two disks fails, the data is gone. > > Better use > isn't this the same as a single disk, though?
no, raid-0 is worse: if any of your two disks fails, the data is gone. raid0
is just faster.
with raid1, any of the two disks can fail and the data will still be there.
> > raid10 instead, though for that you will need 3 disks at least. Also
> > putting / and /opt on an SSD will speed up things massivly. (So just
> > keep /home on real harddisks.) A 120gb SSD is about 100€ and (if
> > possible) IME is the best investment for an old machine.
>
> I am going to buy a new machine. A core-5 or 7 with tons of RAM,
> rather than a xeon with less. Do you think / and /opt on SSD and the
> rest on 7200 sata is good enough for ~30 concurrent users (perhaps
> rare peak of 50)? Or do I still need raid?
should be fine. but I'd go for raid1 for /home and / and /opt on ssd.
cheers,
Holger
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
