Timeline for Intel ICH9/10R raid 5 drive failure
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 19, 2009 at 7:15 | comment | added | user10762 | By safety I mean redundancy as in some protection from a drive failure. Software RAID mirroring (RAID 1) is not any better than RAID 5 (software or hardware) in providing protection against a drive failure. Of course using a RAID array is not a substitute for regular backups it is just an added layer of protection. | |
| Oct 18, 2009 at 21:07 | comment | added | quack quixote | @davpen: RAID doesn't provide safety, it provides performance and/or redundancy. If you want safety you're better off in a software-RAID mirroring configuration than a RAID-5 setup. | |
| Oct 8, 2009 at 3:09 | comment | added | user10762 | I would generally agree with using a normal single drive for most home systems. However this is a software development system and I like the added safety of a raid setup. I do have proper backups kept in a fireproof safe as well. | |
| Oct 3, 2009 at 18:10 | history | answered | William Hilsum | CC BY-SA 2.5 |