On Monday, 17 March 2003 at 18:37:46 +0200, Vallo Kallaste wrote: > On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 12:19:32PM +0000, Scott Mitchell > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Thanks -- you've confirmed what I suspected, that I could have avoided the >> problems I saw by being a bit more cautious. My bad. >> >> Out of interest though, why do you advise not putting critical data on a >> Vinum R5 volume? This one has been running fine for ~2 years under >> reasonable loads. The disk failure was the first time it's required any >> attention at all, and it seems the problems I had with that were mostly of >> my own making. The mailing lists don't seem to be overrun with people >> complaining that 'Vinum ate my files' :-) > > Because RAID5 main features are to increase data redundancy _and_ > data availability. As you have discovered, it runs until it fails > and then you'll have a hard time recovering it. Recovery is the most > important (and difficult) part of it.
Well, everybody else seems to manage fine. It's not difficult, just unreliable in your experience. And yes, I take your experience seriously, but it's not what most other people see. Greg -- When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients. If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients. For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html See complete headers for address and phone numbers
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
