On Thu, Jul 06, 2006 at 12:32:13AM +0100, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2006/07/06 00:13, Joachim Schipper wrote:
> > The OS shouldn't use the disk much, but adding CF will make your server
> > more complex, more expensive, and slower. I really don't see the point.
>
> OTOH, if files on the HD are only accessed infrequently and the disk
> is spun down the rest of the time, this could reduce power use, heat
> and noise, and isn't any more complicated than, say, having two hard
> drives.
>
> We are now in the days of being able to make a complete OS install
> onto a flashcard which costs less than the cheapest hard drive.
Is this still the case if you include the controller? I don't know, just
asking...
Your point about noise is correct, though.
> > Or, if possible, a RAID array (which is fast, not too expensive
> > if you actually use the I, and more reliable than any single disk).
>
> "more reliable than any single disk" - not always.
Well, given a good RAID card or software RAID implementation, a clueful
admin, and decent disks, it should be pretty good. Or do you have other
experiences? I am quite happy with RAIDframe...
Joachim
