On Mar 9, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Chris Murphy wrote: > Chad, I am aware of the magnitude of the problem *IF* corruption occurs in > RAID 5. That is not even remotely relevant with a conversation about the > probability of such corruption. > > There appear to be two competing claims here: > > 1. RAID 5 itself is well known for having silent data corruption and should > not be used. > > 2. Apple sold, until very recently a Mac OS X based, hardware RAID 5 > solution, supposedly honoring a "do no evil, cause not harm" philosophy. > > RAID 5 is not a new thing. Silent data corruption is not a new thing. I won't > buy an argument suggesting Apple just figured this out recently and that's > one of the reasons why they killed the Xserve RAID.
What does RAID5 have to do with the Apple XSserve RAID which got killed off years ago and and did raid 0, 1, 10, 0+1. Oh yeah, it did raid 5 too, if you accepted the raid5 trade offs. Yes Apple, and other vendors, sell raid5 controllers. People that buy raid5 choose raid5 over other raid levels as a trade off. Apple's not doing evil or causing harm here. -d ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dan Shoop [email protected] GoogleVoice: 1-646-402-5293 aim: iWiring twitter: @colonelmode _______________________________________________ MacOSX-admin mailing list [email protected] http://www.omnigroup.com/mailman/listinfo/macosx-admin
