Seagate ST3320613AS vs ST3320620NS

>> Don't forget to back up the stuff periodically.
>
> Don't worry about me ;-)

On second thought, the so-called RAID or fault tolerance
is just a real-time backup strategy...

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04) Linux 2.6.25.4
^ ^ 11:14:01 up 2 days 20:55 2 users load average: 3.58 3.59 3.56
? ? (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) wrote:

>>> Don't forget to back up the stuff periodically.
>>
>>
>> Don't worry about me ;-)
>
>
> On second thought, the so-called RAID or fault tolerance
> is just a real-time backup strategy...
>
I disagree. Suffer e.g. a power supply failure or fire, and your
entire RAID array is gone. A proper backup is on separate media
physically removed from the scene.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.

Previously CJT <abujlehc@prodigy.net> wrote:
> Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) wrote:

>>>> Don't forget to back up the stuff periodically.
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't worry about me ;-)
>>
>>
>> On second thought, the so-called RAID or fault tolerance
>> is just a real-time backup strategy...
>>
> I disagree. Suffer e.g. a power supply failure or fire, and your
> entire RAID array is gone. A proper backup is on separate media
> physically removed from the scene.

Well, a backup is just redundancy. But the level of redundancy a RAID
offers is generelly thought to be too low to be sensible. It really is
a judgement call though, but one you need to make on an informed
basis. For data that is not too valuable, RAID may be enough.
Fopr other data, you may really want that off-site backup and make
a restoration trial once every year. Depends.

Arno

> I disagree. Suffer e.g. a power supply failure or fire, and your
> entire RAID array is gone. A proper backup is on separate media
> physically removed from the scene.

Again, it's just a different implementation of backup...

Real "fault tolerance", in my opinion, means an "immortal"
server, eternal "youth".

--
@~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04) Linux 2.6.25.4
^ ^ 18:18:01 up 31 min 0 users load average: 1.00 1.00 0.98
? ? (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...ub_addressesa/

Previously "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I disagree. Suffer e.g. a power supply failure or fire, and your
>> entire RAID array is gone. A proper backup is on separate media
>> physically removed from the scene.

> Again, it's just a different implementation of backup...

> Real "fault tolerance", in my opinion, means an "immortal"
> server, eternal "youth".

Very true ;-)

Arno

Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) wrote:
>> I disagree. Suffer e.g. a power supply failure or fire, and your
>> entire RAID array is gone. A proper backup is on separate media
>> physically removed from the scene.
>
>
> Again, it's just a different implementation of backup...
>
> Real "fault tolerance", in my opinion, means an "immortal"
> server, eternal "youth".
>

I see data loss in your future.

--
The e-mail address in our reply-to line is reversed in an attempt to
minimize spam. Our true address is of the form che...@prodigy.net.

In article <48475a4f$1@127.0.0.1>, Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)
<toylet.toylet@gmail.com> writes

>On second thought, the so-called RAID or fault tolerance
>is just a real-time backup strategy...

Er, no. it doesn't protect against accidental deletion or filesystem
corruption.

--
(\__/) Bunny says NO to Windows Vista!
(='.'=) http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut00...ista_cost.html
(")_(") http://www.cypherpunks.to/~peter/vista.pdf

Previously Mike Tomlinson <mike@jasper.org.uk> wrote:
> In article <48475a4f$1@127.0.0.1>, Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)
> <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> writes

>>On second thought, the so-called RAID or fault tolerance
>>is just a real-time backup strategy...

> Er, no. it doesn't protect against accidental deletion or filesystem
> corruption.

Backups come in many fashions and protect against a smaller or
larger sets of things that can go wrong. But I agree that
calling RAID a ''backup'' is dangerous, because many people
will just hear the one term and not understand or be interested
in what it actually means for a concrete implementation.

Arno

"Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:48439b10@127.0.0.1...
>
> which one is better?

I've had 4 out of 5 ST3320613AS drives fail within an hour of installation.

Tony

Tony <MyEmail@my.isp.net> wrote
> Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k) <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> wrote

>> which one is better?

> I've had 4 out of 5 ST3320613AS drives fail within an hour of installation.

Fark, there must be something badly wrong with the system they were installed in
or someone dropped the inadequately packaged drives before they were installed.