If your on a really tight budget you can get good reliability with a
Software mirrored SLED configuration (thats Single Large Expensive Disk) if
you use two scsi controllers one for each disk. Other wise I agree with the
general sentiment that software RAID is bad, very bad.
xylog
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Baker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "NT System Admin Issues" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 6:59 PM
Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
> Truly mission critical = Hardware SCSI RAID controller
>
> Not really mission critical = Hardware ATA RAID controller
>
> Plain broke and someone else's data = Software RAID on a Workstation class
> system.
>
>
> - ASB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RE Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 2:04 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> If you truly have a "mission critical" application/data then push the
> "hardware solution", on the other hand if you don't really need it...
>
> now I'm up to $.04..........
>
> RE Young MCSE
> Client Server System Engineering
> Dallas, TX
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 12:50 PM
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> That is very true and if I can't get the money to purchase a RAID
> controller, software is the way I'll have to go. Hopefully I will be able
> to convince them and/or I'll have to use one of my tricks for staying
under
> the limit that requires approval. ;-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RE Young [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:38 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Re: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> I have used softrware raid in hundreds of NT servers for years w/o
problems,
> it is there to use. if for example, there is no money in the buget for
> hardware raid controllers, the reality is money is an issue.
>
> My $.02..........
>
> RE Young MCSE
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 10:50 AM
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> That's too funny. I do at least know Hardware RAID is better than
Software
> RAID. And if NT will allow me to duplex, as it was suggested by someone
> else, then that's probably what I'll do.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Flanagan, Kevin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, August 30, 2001 4:48 AM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> I second this, only ever use Hardware RAID, which RAID config depends on
> what you are doing.
>
> When interviewing folks for an open position at my last employer we had
> someone say that they thought that software RAID was "slick", that was the
> last thing he said that I heard.
>
>
>
>
> Kevin
>
>
>
> +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
> Kevin Flanagan
> C/S Planning Engineer III
> I/T Implementation Department
> Branch Banking & Trust Company
> 3261 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 116
> MC: 172-85-01-00
> Raleigh, NC 27604
> Voice: 919-716-6209
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 7:34 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> Thanks for the info. I will see if I can do that.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Zangara, Jim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:23 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> volume sets are notoriously bad - they have a way of crashing at bad
times -
> I would personally do a raid array witha good hardware (Adaptec) raid
> controller.
>
>
> Jim Zangara, MCSE+I
> Special Projects Engineer
> Premiere Radio Networks
> A Division of Clear Channel Communications
> 15260 Ventura Blvd Suite 500
> Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
> Direct: (818) 461-8620
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
> In my house there's this light switch that doesn't do anything. Every so
> often I would flick it on and off just to check. Yesterday, I got a call
> from a woman in Germany. She said, "Cut it out." -- Steven Wright
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:19 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> Cool. So, I could create 3 of them as one volume so I don't have to give
> each drive a drive letter and then mirror that volume to the other three
> drives?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Wittenberg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:06 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: RE: Hard drive configuration
>
>
> Duplexing to NT is the same as mirroring. Windows does not care if they
are
> on one controller (mirroring) or on two controllers (duplexing)
> Eric Wittenberg, MCSE CNA ASE
> Technical Systems Analyst
> 3D Computer Services Ltd.
> Edmonton, Alberta
> (780)484 9788 Fax (780) 484 9811
> e-mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> URL www.3dcomp.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2001 4:58 PM
> To: NT System Admin Issues
> Subject: Hard drive configuration
> I currently have a NetWare server with 6 Seagate ST39175LW drives on 2
> Adaptec controllers in a duplexed configuration. We are going to rebuild
> the server as NT 4.0. I don't think NT can mirror the drives in a
duplexed
> configuration like the one we currently have. Am I wrong. If not, what
> would be the best configuration for the drives. I was thinking of adding
a
> single drive on the build-in controller for the OS and using the other 6
for
>
> data storage. I'm just not sure how I should configure the other drives.
> Thanks, Michelle
>
> http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
>
>
http://www.sunbelt-software.com/ntsysadmin_list_charter.htm
