• Redhotkurt
      link
      fedilink
      8
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      For availability, yes, but RAID is not a substitute for proper backup procedures. E.g. - offsite, cloud, or automated scheduled local backups, or even regular data integrity checks.

        • @Dominic@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          I don’t think the drive actually failed. The article said that the files disappeared from the drive one-by-one, which sounds like a firmware bug to me.

          You could theoretically have the same problem due to a buggy RAID controller or driver.

          • @argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            21 year ago

            I don’t think the drive actually failed. The article said that the files disappeared from the drive one-by-one

            It didn’t fail in the sense of reporting an I/O error, but it did fail in the sense that the bytes previously written to it can’t be read any more.

            which sounds like a firmware bug to me.

            Could be. SSD firmware is pretty notorious for data loss.

            You could theoretically have the same problem due to a buggy RAID controller or driver.

            Which is why I don’t trust hardware RAID controllers, only software RAID, preferably with per-block checksums so that the software RAID controller knows which copy is the good copy.

            The author is using macOS, whose APFS file system has those features. Linux’s btrfs does too.

      • @Doombot1
        link
        English
        51 year ago

        RAID 1. Raid 0 stripes data between disks, meaning you get much faster I/O speeds but if one disk fails, you lose it all. RAID 1 is when you have 2 (or more) disks and the data is mirrored between both. So if one does, you’ve got a perfect copy of it on the other disk. RAID 0 = “striped”, RAID 1 = “mirrored”