Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Question: Real-Time Back-up

Tags:
  • Homebuilt
  • Hardware
  • Systems
Last response: in Systems
Share
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 8, 2004 4:36:48 PM

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.

More about : question real time back

Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 8, 2004 7:20:12 PM

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/
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 8, 2004 8:20:27 PM

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
Related resources
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 9, 2004 2:40:26 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 9, 2004 5:07:30 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 14, 2004 6:17:09 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 15, 2004 1:54:06 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 15, 2004 10:03:38 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 16, 2004 12:03:06 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 16, 2004 12:11:43 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b B Homebuilt system
April 16, 2004 4:23:14 AM

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...
April 17, 2004 2:46:19 AM

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
!