Random Thoughts V3.0 - Page 1189 - The Drunken stepFORUM - A place to discuss your worthless opinions

Tablefor5 · #**11881** 03-26-2010, 09:10 PM

HOORAY BEER

Magnusrex · #**11882** 03-26-2010, 09:18 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

i'm back what did i miss?
come foetus, no one will see you do it, it's time to mess with the retard neighbors.

**~~spiritwolf_1978~~** · #**11883** 03-26-2010, 09:21 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

cleetus is the retard neighbor.

McHookerino · #**11884** 03-26-2010, 09:26 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

its amazing!

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

Bullshit, its fucking freezing outside!

#**11885** 03-26-2010, 09:28 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

I dunno why Striker has one but i have one on my editing system for throughput. All the drives striped gives a much faster throughput for fast info delivery... needed in video editing.

I have a gigantic Ultra-Wide SCSI raid array with 10,000 rpm Cheetah drives. It is a beast... probably measures 50cm x 90cm -- i'll take a picture of it for you to see.

The external drives i have are for my laptop.

TheSNakE · #**11886** 03-26-2010, 09:28 PM

so hey Foetus, how's the freedom going?

TheSNakE · #**11887** 03-26-2010, 09:34 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

hmmm, I need to do more homework. so basically you run SCSI drives from the RAID controller? I thought it had something to do with backing up your system.

Striker · #**11888** 03-26-2010, 09:52 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

With RAID (Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks) 5, the data is spread across all (in this case) 3 drives, plus a parity bit. So let's say I copy a movie over... the movie is spread across HDD1 and HDD2 the parity data on HDD3. Then the next movie will be spread across HDD2 and HDD3 with the parity on HDD1. The next across HDD3 and HDD1 with parity on HDD2.

It makes it so I can recover from the failure of any ONE of the drives and not lose any data. But only one. If two of my drives shit out, I'm fucked. But, that's where RAID 6 would be better because it uses dual-parity allowing you to recover from up to 2 drive failures at the same time.

RAID 5 needs a min of 3 drives, RAID 6 needs 4, hence the reason I'm using RAID 5. RAID 6 is better for larger arrays since the more drives you have, the greater your chances of one shitting out. What becomes scary about RAID 5 is if I do lose a drive, during the time it would take to rebuild it using a new 1TB drive, I could not survive another drive failure or I would lose data. Not so with RAID 6.

RAID 4 is pretty much the same as RAID 5 except all of the parity gets stored on the same drive instead of spread across the RAID. Either way I'm still sacrificing the capacity of one drive to parity information.

RAID 3 and 2 also use parity, the difference is in how and not something I could explain.

RAID 1 is simple mirrored array. Min of 2 drives. So with 2 drives, any data written to HDD1 will also get put on HDD2. The two drives will contain the same exact data. No parity.

RAID 0 is a striped set, no parity, no mirroring. Min of 2 disks. Any data written to the array would get spread across the disks. Any disk failure will result in data lose.

Then there are hybrid systems like RAID 0+1, RAID 1+0 and RAID 5+1.

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

Sound like he is running RAID 0. Which is just combining multiable drives into "one". While he may get good throughput, his data would be lost if any one of his drives failed.

It's not just SCSI drives. You can use PATA (IDE) or, in my case, SATA.

Striker · #**11889** 03-26-2010, 10:00 PM

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.

I have one because I wanted to increase my storage capacity with "one" drive but also have data redundancy in case of a problem. I've spent a lot of time downloading all this shit, I don't want to lose it. I also wanted to have it network accesable without the need to always have a certain computer on and without having to set that up in Windows.

When I was using several hard drives, it began to become an issue with where to store what. I had a 500GB USB drive that I was trying to store my TV shows and movies on. But then I started to run out of room. I didn't want to split my movies (or shows) up across two different drives. I wanted them all in the same place. And I was also getting quite worried about hard drive failure costing me everything.

It took a bit of money (the NAS was around $500 itself plus the cost of 3 1TB drives), but I did it, and I'm very happy with it.

TheSNakE · #**11890** 03-26-2010, 10:02 PM

Fish started a thread about it. I am going to copy this over. Thanks for the excellent explanation.

Code:

Content, Pictures  and Download links visible to registered users only. 

REGISTER NOW to access all areas that are invisible to non-members.