Skip to main content
The 2024 Developer Survey results are live! See the results
Super User

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

9
  • 1
    It sounds like what you want is software RAID. There's no point in error correction on one drive because the drive as a whole is the most likely point of failure and drives already have error detection in hardware.
    – David Schwartz
    Commented Oct 21, 2012 at 7:47
  • 1
    If you only have one drive, it's hopeless. The most likely failure is the loss of that drive, and then what can you do? Also, something odd is going on with your question. If this is for backup, why does it need to be so reliable? Won't you still have the original if the backup system fails? If you really mean this is instead of backup, you're really going the wrong way!
    – David Schwartz
    Commented Oct 21, 2012 at 8:03
  • 3
    I simply want a "more reliable" solution then a standard one, because often happens that some few clusters damages over time. If data are not lost after the damaged clusters detection, i can replace the new drive having not lost any data.
    – Alfatau
    Commented Oct 21, 2012 at 8:06
  • 2
    Yes, in fact in my experience is happens really more frequently then a sudden drive failure. Also, i had many disks with damaged clusters (and lost files) while only one has suddenly failed.
    – Alfatau
    Commented Oct 21, 2012 at 8:09
  • 1
    Considering to use 2+ drives and replicate backups is in the same direction of disk redundancy, so it is an hw solution. Then i think it will be better to buy a NAS with raid support.
    – Alfatau
    Commented Oct 21, 2012 at 8:13