- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- HPE ProLiant
- >
- ProLiant Servers (ML,DL,SL)
- >
- Re: Further questioning the RAID 1
ProLiant Servers (ML,DL,SL)
1753504
Members
4937
Online
108794
Solutions
Forums
Categories
Company
Local Language
юдл
back
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
юдл
back
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Blogs
Information
Community
Resources
Community Language
Language
Forums
Blogs
Go to solution
Topic Options
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-18-2005 06:58 AM
тАО10-18-2005 06:58 AM
Not try to make it an issue :-) , just not so sure about this RAID 1. Assume for a server, Disk A's data is 100% duplicated on Disk B. In the event of the crashing of DIsk A, the Disk B will pick up the task. So the transition is smooth -- Peace of mind.
But, not for long, since I can not leave a crippled disk (Disk A) in the box, for what if the Disk B is someday crashed, then "who" will take over the task?. So I'll take the server offline to repair the Disk A, No?
If so, then what is the difference between using the tape-backupped data to do the recovery, and this RAID 1? Both eventually need to take the server offline for the repairing.
Therefore, using more disks to hold more data and do disk striping is more meaning to me, than using the RAID 1 to do the duplication.
How do you think of this, please share your view.
Thanks.
Scott
But, not for long, since I can not leave a crippled disk (Disk A) in the box, for what if the Disk B is someday crashed, then "who" will take over the task?. So I'll take the server offline to repair the Disk A, No?
If so, then what is the difference between using the tape-backupped data to do the recovery, and this RAID 1? Both eventually need to take the server offline for the repairing.
Therefore, using more disks to hold more data and do disk striping is more meaning to me, than using the RAID 1 to do the duplication.
How do you think of this, please share your view.
Thanks.
Scott
Solved! Go to Solution.
2 REPLIES 2
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-18-2005 07:40 AM
тАО10-18-2005 07:40 AM
Solution
Scott,
There is no need to take the server offline to repair DiskA or the array. Simply remove the failed DiskA and replace with a known good drive. The array controller will rebuild the array on the fly without any downtime at all. Heck, if you have a hot spare configured it will even rebuild the array with zero intervention.
There is no need to take the server offline to repair DiskA or the array. Simply remove the failed DiskA and replace with a known good drive. The array controller will rebuild the array on the fly without any downtime at all. Heck, if you have a hot spare configured it will even rebuild the array with zero intervention.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-18-2005 08:01 AM
тАО10-18-2005 08:01 AM
Re: Further questioning the RAID 1
Restoring the data from a backup is slower that using mirror.
Even if you must take offline your server, you just replace the disk and boot. Then the data will be available and replicated to the replacement disk.
Stripping is only good for performance, but the availability of the stripping (MTBF) is the MTBF of the disk divided by the ammount of disks. So, if you have four disk in RAID 0, and the spected lifetime of the disk is 4 years, you will have a lifetime for the RAID 0 of 4/4=1 year.
If you loose 1 disk, all data is unavailable.
So, RAID 0 is good for performance but very bad for availability.
Even if you must take offline your server, you just replace the disk and boot. Then the data will be available and replicated to the replacement disk.
Stripping is only good for performance, but the availability of the stripping (MTBF) is the MTBF of the disk divided by the ammount of disks. So, if you have four disk in RAID 0, and the spected lifetime of the disk is 4 years, you will have a lifetime for the RAID 0 of 4/4=1 year.
If you loose 1 disk, all data is unavailable.
So, RAID 0 is good for performance but very bad for availability.
Por que hacerlo dificil si es posible hacerlo facil? - Why do it the hard way, when you can do it the easy way?
The opinions expressed above are the personal opinions of the authors, not of Hewlett Packard Enterprise. By using this site, you accept the Terms of Use and Rules of Participation.
News and Events
Support
© Copyright 2024 Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP