It is safe for data, because if a RAID controller goes bad, you won't
lose data. Swap in a new RAID controller, it can read the RAID set
info off the drives, and you're back up and running in no time. If you
have a spare controller on hand (i.e. you purchased a spares kit), this
swap takes 30-60 seconds.
However, it does have "uptime" implications. If a controller goes, the
entire volume (that is, both halves) goes offline for the duration.
This effectively doubles your chances of losing availability. It's two
"single points of failure" and some people won't tolerate ANY, so if
that's your goal, it's not a recommended approach.
Cheers,
-Bill
On Oct 29, 2004, at 2:23 PM, Ken Carlile wrote:
My question is, is RAID 50 safe (redundant)? My head gets confused
when I try to think about raid systems greater than 5.
