Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

RAID Concatenation vs Stripe

tom.

tom.

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Nov 9, 2007
354
2
San Francisco, CA
I am wondering exactly what the advantages and disadvantages of each are. As far as I can see the concatenation (or JBOD) is slower and you still lose both disks if one fails.

I have 2 x 1TB disks and ideally I would like them to appear as one. Is there another solution where i wont lose ALL my data if one disk fails?

Thanks
 
tom. said:
I am wondering exactly what the advantages and disadvantages of each are. As far as I can see the concatenation (or JBOD) is slower and you still lose both disks if one fails.

I have 2 x 1TB disks and ideally I would like them to appear as one. Is there another solution where i wont lose ALL my data if one disk fails?

Thanks
Click to expand...

The only way to ensure data integrity is by using RAID 1 (Mirroring), so that if one drive fails the other will still be intact, mountable and usable. The downside of this is that you will have 1/2 of the space. In other words 2 x 1TB disks will yield 1TB of space.
 
merl1n said:
The only way to ensure data integrity is by using RAID 1 (Mirroring), so that if one drive fails the other will still be intact, mountable and usable. The downside of this is that you will have 1/2 of the space. In other words 2 x 1TB disks will yield 1TB of space.
Click to expand...

Yes, this isn't an option for me. What I am looking for is an option which will not double my risk of data loss, just keep it the same as it is in single disks. So if one disk fails i don't lose the whole lot, just the one disk of data.

I need the 2TB in space otherwise i would mirror. I guess what i need is a way of making them appear as one, when actually data is being stored an individual disks.
 
Because i can be storing very large files, it is useful to have the drive appear as one, instead of deciding which drive it must be placed on. Its more of a convenience, speed is not an issue.
 
Looks like you are going to need a third disk if you want to attain your desired capacity, speed and data integrity.

I use raid-0 with two disks, which is fast, but I also have to perform regular backups in case of failure.
 
tom. said:
Yes, this isn't an option for me. What I am looking for is an option which will not double my risk of data loss, just keep it the same as it is in single disks. So if one disk fails i don't lose the whole lot, just the one disk of data.

I need the 2TB in space otherwise i would mirror. I guess what i need is a way of making them appear as one, when actually data is being stored an individual disks.
Click to expand...

Then I believe your only option would be to add and additional hard drive and hardware RAID controller card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back