On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 7:51 AM, Kevin Cully <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't know how many RAID systems I've seen fail because the backplane > failed. The biggest mistake I see clients make in this situation is thinking that RAID == backup. It's not. RAID provides _availability_, so that a single HDD failure doesn't take down the facility. They still need backup. That's a separate thing. > I'm a fan of cheap duplicated redundant simple systems with failovers. > I think the costs come out to be the same, setup and recover are cheaper > and faster. $0.02. It very much depends upon the clients requirements for uptime and reliability, costs of downtime and capacity needs. If the client is slinging around a couple hundred megabytes of DBCs and DBFs, a shadow copy can be enough. If they've got gigabytes or terabytes and can't afford a Server Down error, RAID and clustering solutions make sense. Units like the Buffalo NAS (or a do-it-yourself Linux-based RAID5 NAS or FreeSolaris ZFS server) is easy enough and cheap enough to set up and great for ensuring the machine is available online 24x7 for use by the business. Building two of them rather than one and mirroring the first to the second (maybe on a separate power supply, in a separate data center/closet) is cheap insurance. But you still want off-site backups. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[email protected] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
