>24 TB in a RAID 5
SSHD
Angel Martin
Henry Barnes
Oh noes, one 4kb sector might be corrupted in a rebuild. What a world, what a world.
Ryan Allen
More like a rebuild will take so long and tax the drives so badly that you can easily get another failure. It's not a big deal if you have a backup and can tolerate downtime and restoring. But if that's true, then using RAID 5 instead of jbod was a dumb idea to begin with.
Brandon White
RAID 5 is too risky for serious business but for a home NAS it's fine.
Lincoln Murphy
>tax the drives so badly
>one big sequential read
>one big sequential write
If you don't worry about Chkdsk or Truecrypt killing your drive, you should worry about a rebuild.
Jayden Gomez
It's a bad compromise no matter what you're doing once you get beyond 6-12 TB, depending on the performance. Plus, you have to get a new drive in there right away, or have a hot spare, but if you have a spare on hand it should have been a 6 to begin with.
Failures and rebuilds usually happen when the drives are already older. Yes, a full sequential read on an old disk makes me nervous, because I've seen them fail, and this isn't just one drive. This is all in the array minus one. The likelihood of catastrophic failure is pretty high even with his 6 4YmTB drives
raid-failure.com
Isaiah Brooks
>raid-failure.com
wow, what an unbiased source
>It's a bad compromise no matter what you're doing
Avoiding redownloading animu/games while also avoiding duplicating/triplicating your drives.
Mason Young
The most probable outcome is that none of the drives fail. And even if one does, the rebuild will probably succeed. Of course this is not good enough for a company database or customer data where a failure will be extremely expensive. But for storing your movie collection it's fine.
Charles Gray
Okay guys whatever. Pretty much nobody with a clue trusts RAID 5 anymore for the reasons I've described, but I bet they're all just morons.
Jeremiah Bell
> seagate
> ever