Rich Freeman on 22 Aug 2016 10:25:49 -0700 |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: [PLUG] RAID6 or RAID5+HS? |
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Keith C. Perry <kperry@daotechnologies.com> wrote: > > What was on my mind was this... Lets not go crazy of the new shiny > thing. Yes ZFS (and BTRFS) have more mechanisms to protection their > file systems from failures. That conversation usually leads to > something about random bits flipped to which I say, if you are worried > about that then run systems with ECC RAM because any bit flip anywhere > will lead to data corruption somewhere. In other words, use the right > tool for the job (when you can). I mostly agree, but I just wanted to say that lack of ECC isn't really a reason to prefer something less robust. You have more security with non-ECC+btrfs/zfs than non-ECC+ext4. The other factor is that picking a filesystem is purely a matter of software. Having ECC RAM requires a supporting northbridge/motherboard. If you're going the AMD route it is often available "for free" other than the extra cost on the RAM itself. You just have to check motherboard compatibility (which often isn't well-documented). If you're going the Intel route it means buying an i7 or Xeon, and that is anything but free unless you were already planning on buying one. Intel disables ECC support on the i5 and lower CPUs (just another reason we should all be praying that AMD comes out with a decent next generation, whether you intend to ever buy an AMD chip or not). However, when I buy my next server CPU I do actually plan to take a look at ECC. I actually had a windows desktop drive hosed by a RAM corruption recently. It was a pain but the system didn't really house anything critical > > My point from there is that ZFS and BTRFS do NOT mean you don't run backups. No argument there, though both filesystems offer a much more streamlined solution for backups. (Though I'm not inclined to trust it so much for btrfs.) And as you point out some data may not require backup. RAID helps avoid downtime in the event of hard drive hardware failure. That is a common failure mode worth protecting against, but it isn't the only one out there. Backups protect against many other failure modes, but they almost always involve substantial downtime when you need to rely on them. I'd look at RAID as a way to change the oil on your car without turning it off. It doesn't eliminate the need for other preventative maintenance, but you know you'll need oil changes, and so it doesn't hurt to be able to do it on the run. -- Rich ___________________________________________________________________________ Philadelphia Linux Users Group -- http://www.phillylinux.org Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce General Discussion -- http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug