On Monday 14 January 2008 12:11:50 am Mike Miller wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Andrew Zbikowski wrote: > > Justin just underscored that RAID is not a replacement for backups. > > Some kinds of RAID are a kind of backup. If one drive is mirroring > another, it is a backup copy in case the first drive fails. > > That said, of course you'd be completely crazy not to have daily tape > backups transported by Brinks to four distant locations in the US and > stored in vaults with guard dogs and armed security staff. Or maybe just > copies at home and office would work. > > Mike > RAID is no substitute for backups. In 12 years of using RAID I've lost arrays that required multiple drive failures twice. Once was a trio of PATA drives in a mirror with a hot spare, drive 0 failed, and while the hot spare was syncing drive 1 failed. The other incident was a RAID 5 array of SCSI drives with a hot spare.....a bad PSU left scorch marks on all 4 drives. In any case, I realized the importance of backups a long time ago, and while I can't say I've never lost data I can say it's been a couple decades since I lost data I cared about. -- Thanks, Josh Paetzel PGP: 8A48 EF36 5E9F 4EDA 5A8C 11B4 26F9 01F1 27AF AECB -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20080116/55236aef/attachment.pgp