Question: Real-Time Back-up

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?

It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.

Thanks a lot.

Darren Harris
Staten Island, New York.
11 answers Last reply
More about question real time back
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    Darren Harris wrote:

    > Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
    > inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
    > identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?
    >
    > It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
    > way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
    > same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.
    >
    > Thanks a lot.
    >
    > Darren Harris
    > Staten Island, New York.

    Um, RAID?
    --
    eel Tech
    http://someguy456.computed.net/
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    "Darren Harris" <Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote in message
    news:9437a27c.0404081136.7e510c6@posting.google.com...
    > Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
    > inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
    > identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?
    >
    > It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
    > way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
    > same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.
    >


    Isn't that what RAID 1 does?

    Jim
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    There is. It's called RAID 1: Mirrored drives.

    --
    DaveW


    "Darren Harris" <Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote in message
    news:9437a27c.0404081136.7e510c6@posting.google.com...
    > Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
    > inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
    > identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?
    >
    > It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
    > way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
    > same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.
    >
    > Thanks a lot.
    >
    > Darren Harris
    > Staten Island, New York.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    In article <9437a27c.0404081136.7e510c6
    @posting.google.com>, Searcher7@mail.con2.com says...
    > Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
    > inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
    > identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?
    >
    > It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
    > way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
    > same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.
    >

    RAID1 - Hit the www.promise.com or www.3ware.com
    websites for info on the PCI RAID cards that hook up to
    either (2) PATA or (2) SATA disks.

    Advantages:
    - single drive failure is handled invisibly, until the
    2nd drive fails (make sure to replace failed drives ASAP
    or have a hot spare available)

    Disadvantages:
    - more complicated to install, requires seperate drivers
    during installation
    - often slower then a non-RAID system
    - every byte of storage costs twice as much
    - doesn't protect against accidental deletions or
    corruption of files on the file system

    Sometimes it's better to run a single disk, using Ghost
    periodically as well as a data mirroring program like
    Second Copy to protect the data to a second drive.
    Ghosting allows you to snapshot the O/S so you can go
    back to a fixed point in time when everything was
    working. Second Copy handles keeping a backup copy of
    your data files (along with past revisions, or deleted
    files) on the 2nd drive.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    I assumed that RAID was reliable. But going by the responses here, it
    is the common consensus that RAID has become easy and inexpensive
    also, correct?

    Thanks.

    Darren Harris
    Staten Island, New York.
    ********************************************************************************
    Toshi1873 <toshi1873@nowhere.com> wrote in message news:<MPG.1adff932e26e87c3989833@news-50.giganews.com>...
    > In article <9437a27c.0404081136.7e510c6
    > @posting.google.com>, Searcher7@mail.con2.com says...
    > > Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
    > > inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
    > > identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?
    > >
    > > It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
    > > way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
    > > same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.
    > >
    >
    > RAID1 - Hit the www.promise.com or www.3ware.com
    > websites for info on the PCI RAID cards that hook up to
    > either (2) PATA or (2) SATA disks.
    >
    > Advantages:
    > - single drive failure is handled invisibly, until the
    > 2nd drive fails (make sure to replace failed drives ASAP
    > or have a hot spare available)
    >
    > Disadvantages:
    > - more complicated to install, requires seperate drivers
    > during installation
    > - often slower then a non-RAID system
    > - every byte of storage costs twice as much
    > - doesn't protect against accidental deletions or
    > corruption of files on the file system
    >
    > Sometimes it's better to run a single disk, using Ghost
    > periodically as well as a data mirroring program like
    > Second Copy to protect the data to a second drive.
    > Ghosting allows you to snapshot the O/S so you can go
    > back to a fixed point in time when everything was
    > working. Second Copy handles keeping a backup copy of
    > your data files (along with past revisions, or deleted
    > files) on the 2nd drive.
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    "Darren Harris" <Searcher7@mail.con2.com> wrote in message
    news:9437a27c.0404141317.24e7c225@posting.google.com...
    > I assumed that RAID was reliable. But going by the responses here, it
    > is the common consensus that RAID has become easy and inexpensive
    > also, correct?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > Darren Harris
    > Staten Island, New York.
    >
    ****************************************************************************
    ****
    > Toshi1873 <toshi1873@nowhere.com> wrote in message
    news:<MPG.1adff932e26e87c3989833@news-50.giganews.com>...
    > > In article <9437a27c.0404081136.7e510c6
    > > @posting.google.com>, Searcher7@mail.con2.com says...
    > > > Can anyone explain why after all this time there is no easy,
    > > > inexpensive, and reliable way to get all data to write to two or more
    > > > identically sized hard drives in a system *at exactly the same time*?
    > > >
    > > > It is obvious that if there is a mechanical failure, this is the only
    > > > way that one will still have a back-up drive that is *exactly* the
    > > > same down to every last bit as the drive that went down.
    > > >
    > >
    > > RAID1 - Hit the www.promise.com or www.3ware.com
    > > websites for info on the PCI RAID cards that hook up to
    > > either (2) PATA or (2) SATA disks.
    > >
    > > Advantages:
    > > - single drive failure is handled invisibly, until the
    > > 2nd drive fails (make sure to replace failed drives ASAP
    > > or have a hot spare available)
    > >
    > > Disadvantages:
    > > - more complicated to install, requires seperate drivers
    > > during installation
    > > - often slower then a non-RAID system
    > > - every byte of storage costs twice as much
    > > - doesn't protect against accidental deletions or
    > > corruption of files on the file system
    > >
    > > Sometimes it's better to run a single disk, using Ghost
    > > periodically as well as a data mirroring program like
    > > Second Copy to protect the data to a second drive.
    > > Ghosting allows you to snapshot the O/S so you can go
    > > back to a fixed point in time when everything was
    > > working. Second Copy handles keeping a backup copy of
    > > your data files (along with past revisions, or deleted
    > > files) on the 2nd drive.
    Pretty much yes, alot of MOBO's come with a built in Raid option for the
    IDE controllers which means you only have to supply the additional drives.
    f you don't have this option a raid card is fairly inexpensive now too.
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    "Chris Stolworthy" <cstolworthy12@REMOVEcableone.net> wrote...
    >
    >> I assumed that RAID was reliable. But going by the responses here, it
    >> is the common consensus that RAID has become easy and inexpensive
    >> also, correct?

    > Pretty much yes, alot of MOBO's come with a built in Raid option for the
    > IDE controllers which means you only have to supply the additional drives.
    > f you don't have this option a raid card is fairly inexpensive now too.

    HOWEVER, the RAID options in most current consumer-grade computers are
    SATA-based, offering RAID 0 (striping = performance) or RAID 1 (mirroring = data
    safety), and are limited to 2 HDs in the array. While they do give you a good
    set of options, they will not give the combination of performance and data
    safety of a server-grade, hot-pluggable, RAID 5 (striping + CRC for data
    recovery) array. The RAID 5 array is usually SCSI based and needs a minimum of
    3 HDs.

    There may be EIDE/ATA based RAID controllers available, but I don't think they
    are considered "mainstream" yet, as are the embedded SATA RAID 0/1 controllers.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:03:38 GMT, "John R Weiss"
    <jrweiss98155@.comNOSPAMcast.net> wrote:


    >There may be EIDE/ATA based RAID controllers available, but I don't think they
    >are considered "mainstream" yet, as are the embedded SATA RAID 0/1 controllers.


    Huh?

    Most if not all the major manufacturers have released boards with onboard
    ATA RAID controllers, but they were separate chips like Promise,
    Highpoint, Silicon Image. They've been around for several years, perhaps
    gaining popularity in the past 2-3 years because of a lower price
    differential between those boards having the controller and (essentially
    same model) board without.
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 18:03:38 GMT, "John R Weiss"
    <jrweiss98155@.comNOSPAMcast.net> wrote:

    >There may be EIDE/ATA based RAID controllers available, but I don't think they
    >are considered "mainstream" yet, as are the embedded SATA RAID 0/1 controllers.

    SATA RAID is less mainstream than the EIDE/ATA RAID motherboards. SATA is
    gaining ground, but I think I will stick IDE based boards.

    I have had one, ATA/EIDE RAID for what 3+ years. Long before SATA was around.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    "kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote...
    >
    > Most if not all the major manufacturers have released boards with onboard
    > ATA RAID controllers, but they were separate chips like Promise,
    > Highpoint, Silicon Image. They've been around for several years, perhaps
    > gaining popularity in the past 2-3 years

    OK. I have yet to see any ATA RAID controllers or setups advertised by
    mainstream mfgrs like Dell -- even in their "performance" home machines...
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware,alt.comp.hardware.homebuilt,alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt (More info?)

    On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 00:23:14 GMT, "John R Weiss"
    <jrweiss98155@.comNOSPAMcast.net> wrote:

    >"kony" <spam@spam.com> wrote...
    >>
    >> Most if not all the major manufacturers have released boards with onboard
    >> ATA RAID controllers, but they were separate chips like Promise,
    >> Highpoint, Silicon Image. They've been around for several years, perhaps
    >> gaining popularity in the past 2-3 years
    >
    >OK. I have yet to see any ATA RAID controllers or setups advertised by
    >mainstream mfgrs like Dell -- even in their "performance" home machines...

    Look at the RAID offerings for the low end Dell servers like the 400sc
    line. Ide raid controllers. Some of them Promise, some unnamed
    manufacturer. Targeted at the small business server market. They have
    offered IDE RAID for a couple years.

    Also look at the raid controllers from Adaptec and 3ware. This is not
    counting the SATA raid that is starting to hit the market

    JT
Ask a new question

Read More

Homebuilt Hardware Systems