Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Hi, 

 

I have been tasked with configuring a server that previously had a raid 5 fail see below


The specs of the server are
HP 380 G6

intel e5603

6 gb ram

2 x 1tb raid 1 c:/

1 x 1tb hs

1 x 1tb ssh

12 x tb raid 5 (I'm currently trying to repair)

No backups......

 

 

They want me to suggest a better way to set there server up -

 

My suggestions are (for storage)  either Raid 10 – 4 x 4tb or 8x2GB

Raid 6 – 4 x 4tb or 8x2GB

 

Setting up smtp (I'm not sure if i need ilo for this or not)

Setting up a stand along storage unit to back up every day with 20TB raid 6 (8 x 4tb)

 

Anyone have any suggestions?

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can afford it always do at least RAID 10.

 

You'll get better redundancy then RAID 5-6 and you'll get better performance since you are not worrying about parity checks anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you buying new drives? 

 

Id go raid 10 if you need performance, raid 6 if you don't really care about performance

 

Id get the biggest drives you can.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/30/2020 at 8:00 PM, Electronics Wizardy said:

Are you buying new drives? 

 

Id go raid 10 if you need performance, raid 6 if you don't really care about performance

 

Id get the biggest drives you can.

no, don't use raid 6. You can only lose one disk. The only advantage with raid 6 is faster repair. Because you use 2 parity disks instead of one (RAID 5). This means you use more cpu to calculate(if no raid controller), its slower and you still have the same amount of storage space as you would have with RAID 10. But RAID 10 is way faster in read and write. And you can lose 1 disks per RAID 1 set.

 

Why is it important that you can lose more then 2 disks. Well Murphy's Law.... If you are restoring the data you make a big hit on the disks so the chance that another one breaks is higher then normal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Ubuntu is love said:

no, don't use raid 6. You can only lose one disk

That's RAID5. RAID6 can lose two disks.

Hand, n. A singular instrument worn at the end of the human arm and commonly thrust into somebody’s pocket.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ubuntu is love said:

no, don't use raid 6. You can only lose one disk. The only advantage with raid 6 is faster repair. Because you use 2 parity disks instead of one (RAID 5). This means you use more cpu to calculate(if no raid controller), its slower and you still have the same amount of storage space as you would have with RAID 10. But RAID 10 is way faster in read and write. And you can lose 1 disks per RAID 1 set.

 

Why is it important that you can lose more then 2 disks. Well Murphy's Law.... If you are restoring the data you make a big hit on the disks so the chance that another one breaks is higher then normal.

Well with only 4 disks as op said, and pretty small ones id go raid 5. Chance of a dual failure is pretty low, and just restore backups in that case. 

 

Raid 6 can give you a good amount more space on larger arrays, like 8 drives and mosr. 

 

Performance isn't a big issue. MOdern cpus will happily run raid 6 at gigabytes a second

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×