FORUMS: list search recent posts

16TB RAID 5 means I need... 24+TB RAID 1 for archive?

COW Forums : Storage

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Alexander Freedman
16TB RAID 5 means I need... 24+TB RAID 1 for archive?
on May 31, 2017 at 3:53:18 pm

Hello all,

I'm hoping you can help me out here: My office just got a new 27in iMac 5K as part of our upgrade from the current 2011 MacPro Tower we use for video editing.

The iMac has 2TB of onboard storage, and I'd like to add the OWC Thunderbolt 2 - 16TB RAID5 Array (here: https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1078688-REG/owc_other_world_computin... as my media drive.

With that in mind, I'm looking at options for archive/backup storage. Knowing that the OWC will only be 12TB of storage after RAID5, plus the 2TB onboard - that means I need a backup solution at least 14TB+ in size. I don't see 14+TB single HDDs so... does this mean I need ANOTHER array? Obviously, RAID1 for archive which means I need a 28TB+ RAID1 just for backup?

I'm hoping there is a cheaper solution than getting another array just for backup?

Thanks so much for any direction you can provide!


Return to posts index

Alexander Freedman
Re: 16TB RAID 5 means I need... 24+TB RAID 1 for archive?
on Jun 2, 2017 at 2:07:53 pm

Nevermind. I think I've solved my own problem.

I'm going to get a 14TB+ array in JBOD and SPAN it. Just in case anyone else comes here looking for a cheaper solution than a 28TB+ RAID 1 lol. The redundancy isn't there, I know, but with RAID 5 plus this backup - I feel safe enough.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: 16TB RAID 5 means I need... 24+TB RAID 1 for archive?
on Jun 2, 2017 at 3:43:02 pm

Since you're about to embark on upgrading your raid you might want to think about going with Raid10 instead of Raid5. You would lose half of your raid to mirroring but you would also have a safer raid overall. I have two OWC Thunderbays set up in Raid10 and they're working well.

Here's an article explaining why Raid10 is preferred over Raid5:

http://www.baarf.dk/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index


Yuval Dimnik
Re: 16TB RAID 5 means I need... 24+TB RAID 1 for archive?
on Jul 27, 2017 at 2:01:31 pm

When designing storage redundancy keep this question on your list:
"What is the process to get back to desired redundant state after failure?"

Unless you're using SSD drives (which I would assume you do not) you should not use Raid-5/6.
You'll waste capacity as a tradeoff to redundancy, but the chances to recover the Raid in failure scenarios is a bit low:
http://www.enterprisestorageguide.com/raid-disk-rebuild-times

I agree with Greg Janza's benefits of Raid 10, but what will happen once a failure occurs?

An alternative is to look for redundancy through multiple copies or erasure coding for larger capacities.

Yuval
http://www.noobaa.com
yuval.dimnik@noobaa.com


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]