Who is still using raid? It’s not 2006.
Unless you want to go to large scale cluster storage systems, nothing.
Raid is the best way to get disk-level redundancy for a disk volume.
I’m mainly using RAID 6, but I’m still using a lot of SATA drives. I’ll probably need to go with one of the software raids, like z2 when I move away from SATA.
Raid is no longer viable as a performance component, but it is completely viable for redundancy. Large scale cluster storage like Ceph is the way forward for anything larger than what can fit in a single chassis, or a single disk controller. Basically if you have or need more than one 45 drive chassis for storage, look into Ceph.
For everything less, RAID, and if you don’t need redundancy and just want performance, just get a high end NVMe drive and do backups.
I feel like we could get rid of #6 and let the others carry the message for it
It INFURIATES me how many companies will spend money on backups, but not ever test that their backups restore or allow for continued functionality afterwards.
At one company, I banged this drum for years, and one day we had a situation where someone “accidentally” deleted all the media from a client website. I had to dig through several backups and rebuild from beta, which annoyed me endlessly, but I dropped the “I fucking told you so” several times, and hinted that our “restore scripts weren’t working as intended” to the client. It took me a full day to do what should have taken maybe 1-2 hours at most…
Isn’t RAID to prevent against drive failure, not a complete array failure? It works well for its intended purpose.
RAID is not a backup strategy. I use an “oh well”™ strategy. When my last hard drive failed, I said “oh well”™, bought a new SSD, and started from scratch. My patented “oh well”™ system works for both Linux and Windows. Learn how with only three easy courses, from £1495 each. Sign up today!