What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@hobbit666 Good luck
-
I'm getting very frustrated with these posts. The sheer number of people lacking entry level IT knowledge that then post things as if they have a clue and defend it without the slightest idea what they are talking about is just overwhelming. An entire thread of people who can't identify the basic RAID levels, can't figure out when things are safer or more dangerous, even the vendor is clueless here because he is stuck promoting his RAID 5 product. Then people using it as a platform to show off how little they know of software RAID.
http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/1377183-this-is-why-you-should-stay-away-from-raid-5
It's like a showcase of how clueless average IT people are. This is really, really basic stuff in this discussion. In a forum with that much misinformation, how can anyone have a useful discussion?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I'm getting very frustrated with these posts. The sheer number of people lacking entry level IT knowledge that then post things as if they have a clue and defend it without the slightest idea what they are talking about is just overwhelming. An entire thread of people who can't identify the basic RAID levels, can't figure out when things are safer or more dangerous, even the vendor is clueless here because he is stuck promoting his RAID 5 product. Then people using it as a platform to show off how little they know of software RAID.
http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/1377183-this-is-why-you-should-stay-away-from-raid-5
It's like a showcase of how clueless average IT people are. This is really, really basic stuff in this discussion. In a forum with that much misinformation, how can anyone have a useful discussion?
Scott this pimiento said it's this way so I believe he is correct (yes sarcasm)
He placed an Raid 0 array on top of 3 raid 5 arrays wich effectively equals Raid 0. Luckily it was raid 5 under there so SOME fault tollerance was preset. He didnt have one array like you said (raid 50) but he had 4 arrays in total there. If you have 8 raid controllers (Operating system will see that as 8 hard drives) and you place them all in software Raid 0 like he did, you're pushing your luck with every minute. Faul tollerance is 0 raid controllers in that case.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
I'm getting very frustrated with these posts. The sheer number of people lacking entry level IT knowledge that then post things as if they have a clue and defend it without the slightest idea what they are talking about is just overwhelming. An entire thread of people who can't identify the basic RAID levels, can't figure out when things are safer or more dangerous, even the vendor is clueless here because he is stuck promoting his RAID 5 product. Then people using it as a platform to show off how little they know of software RAID.
http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/1377183-this-is-why-you-should-stay-away-from-raid-5
It's like a showcase of how clueless average IT people are. This is really, really basic stuff in this discussion. In a forum with that much misinformation, how can anyone have a useful discussion?
So is Joerg really from WD or from SW? I don't know any of the SW people so I can't tell. But if he is from WD, that's really bad.
Btw, this setup is not RAID 50, this is 3 x RAID 5 stripped in one huge partition with a blown controller.
-
@johnhooks said:
He placed an Raid 0 array on top of 3 raid 5 arrays wich effectively equals Raid 0. Luckily it was raid 5 under there so SOME fault tollerance was preset. He didnt have one array like you said (raid 50) but he had 4 arrays in total there. If you have 8 raid controllers (Operating system will see that as 8 hard drives) and you place them all in software Raid 0 like he did, you're pushing your luck with every minute. Faul tollerance is 0 raid controllers in that case.
That's just a very long winded way of saying RAID 50.
-
@johnhooks said:
@scottalanmiller said:
I'm getting very frustrated with these posts. The sheer number of people lacking entry level IT knowledge that then post things as if they have a clue and defend it without the slightest idea what they are talking about is just overwhelming. An entire thread of people who can't identify the basic RAID levels, can't figure out when things are safer or more dangerous, even the vendor is clueless here because he is stuck promoting his RAID 5 product. Then people using it as a platform to show off how little they know of software RAID.
http://community.spiceworks.com/topic/1377183-this-is-why-you-should-stay-away-from-raid-5
It's like a showcase of how clueless average IT people are. This is really, really basic stuff in this discussion. In a forum with that much misinformation, how can anyone have a useful discussion?
So is Joerg really from WD or from SW? I don't know any of the SW people so I can't tell. But if he is from WD, that's really bad.
Btw, this setup is not RAID 50, this is 3 x RAID 5 stripped in one huge partition with a blown controller.
He's from Western Digital Germany.
-
Wow... The interwebs have gone silent all of a sudden! gasp The horror!
-
I was in teh shower.
-
-
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@johnhooks said:
He placed an Raid 0 array on top of 3 raid 5 arrays wich effectively equals Raid 0. Luckily it was raid 5 under there so SOME fault tollerance was preset. He didnt have one array like you said (raid 50) but he had 4 arrays in total there. If you have 8 raid controllers (Operating system will see that as 8 hard drives) and you place them all in software Raid 0 like he did, you're pushing your luck with every minute. Faul tollerance is 0 raid controllers in that case.
That's just a very long winded way of saying RAID 50.
I just noticed you commented on this haha. I was just pointing out another person now knowing how that works.
He didnt have one array like you said (raid 50) but he had 4 arrays in total there.
-
@scottalanmiller might could look in over here and make some recommendations...
-
Just back home from an amazing night out. Went down to the beach on the Aegean and went to the Living Room Lounge and Cafe in Rethymno and had awesome food. Great crowd. This is very much a college town. Even with no tourist the place is packed on a Tuesday night.
-
Very nice.
-
It was great. And so cheap. In Nicaragua that dinner would have been $120 easy. In the US, $150. In Greece, $30!!
-
@scottalanmiller said:
It was great. And so cheap. In Nicaragua that dinner would have been $120 easy. In the US, $150. In Greece, $30!!
In Greece I would expect everything to be cheap...
-
@dafyre said:
@scottalanmiller might could look in over here and make some recommendations...
Hey, that is @garak0410 why didn't he ask over here?
-
Exporting my functional VM's from my crapbox to my whitebox.
Similar build to what it was before, but at least I'm running. RAM has been RMA's, replacement RAM Ordered.
-
Calling it a day!
-
Just had new functionality added to our Scale cluster. About to go do some playing.
