On Samstag 29 August 2009 Passerone, Daniele wrote:
> But apart from that, it is not as easy to backup 20 TB, so we decided
> to set it as data storage leaving the responsibilty of the backup to
> our users. I do not consider it completely absurd.
Right, if you communicated this to users it's OK.
But really, don't create any RAID with more than 8 data disks.
Performance doesn't increase above that, and the chance that a single
disk dies is already 8x as high as with a single disk.
I wish you luck with your recovery, but please try to split your 20
disks, make it 2x9 disks with a RAID-5, better RAID-6, and connect those
two via RAID-0. So you get a RAID-50 or RAID-60. Take the remaining 2
drives as hot spare. This will protect you at least from drive failures,
and speeds up recreating the RAID when a disk dies.
Try to connect the disks which are in a single RAID-5/6 via the same
controllers, so if a controller dies it's only one RAID-5/6 part that
dies, which will help to make it possible to repair.
// Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc ----- http://it-management.at
// Tel: 0660 / 415 65 31 .network.your.ideas.
// PGP Key: "curl -s http://zmi.at/zmi.asc | gpg --import"
// Fingerprint: AC19 F9D5 36ED CD8A EF38 500E CE14 91F7 1C12 09B4
// Keyserver: wwwkeys.eu.pgp.net Key-ID: 1C1209B4