Burned by Eschewing Best Practices
-
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA (the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA (the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
He just gave you best answer for that last post. No more popcorntime.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..
(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
-
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
Well, he come on now, we still fully recommend RAID5 SSD arrays.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
Well, he come on now, we still fully recommend RAID5 SSD arrays.
SSD is a whole different story
-
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
Well, he come on now, we still fully recommend RAID5 SSD arrays.
SSD is a whole different story
It's a different condition for the same RAID configuration. So to say "never RAID5" needs to be adjusted to "Never RAID5 with classic drives and you must be prepared to replace any failed drives immediately"
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
Well, he come on now, we still fully recommend RAID5 SSD arrays.
SSD is a whole different story
It's a different condition for the same RAID configuration. So to say "never RAID5" needs to be adjusted to "Never RAID5 with classic drives and you must be prepared to replace any failed drives immediately"
Sure. RAID can never replace a backup, that's something else people need to understand.
-
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
Well, he come on now, we still fully recommend RAID5 SSD arrays.
SSD is a whole different story
It's a different condition for the same RAID configuration. So to say "never RAID5" needs to be adjusted to "Never RAID5 with classic drives and you must be prepared to replace any failed drives immediately"
Sure. RAID can never replace a backup, that's something else people need to understand.
That's a completely different topic, that is a question of "Is whatever on the array worth money? No, then don't make a backup. yes, then you need to have detached backups."
That isn't the difference between SSD and Winchester drives in OBR5.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@thwr said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
@scottalanmiller said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Yeah. And not only did he lose everything on RAID 5, but it was on an MSA
Didn't read the thread, but saw that on the link..(the MSA didn't fail, but seriously people, who is buying this stuff) and then practically everyone in the thread including the OP and the main person responding, literally don't know what RAID 5, have no idea that it is bad or know how it works. At least the OP and the main person are unclear and can't be convinced that two lost drives on RAID 5 means that the data is lost!
RAID 5 is single drive parity and even Wikipedia clearly says that if you loose more than one drive, you're screwed. If someone doesn't understand that by 2016, he/she should probably better look for some new profession.
Well, he come on now, we still fully recommend RAID5 SSD arrays.
SSD is a whole different story
It's a different condition for the same RAID configuration. So to say "never RAID5" needs to be adjusted to "Never RAID5 with classic drives and you must be prepared to replace any failed drives immediately"
Sure. RAID can never replace a backup, that's something else people need to understand.
That's a completely different topic, that is a question of "Is whatever on the array worth money? No, then don't make a backup. yes, then you need to have detached backups."
That isn't the difference between SSD and Winchester drives in OBR5.
Yup
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
That's a completely different topic, that is a question of "Is whatever on the array worth money? No, then
don't make a backupdon't bother with RAID or backups. yes, then you need to have detached backups."FTFY
-
This is a lab environment already running hyper-v with 10-12 VM's per host, and he's now trying to determine what RAID configuration to use.
Um how?
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
This is a lab environment already running hyper-v with 10-12 VM's per host, and he's now trying to determine what RAID configuration to use.
Um how?
LOL RAID 1 over 8 drives... snicker
-
I saw that as well, but whatever floats his boat (if it's a lab fine use RAID0 if you want)
Just hope he realizes what he's doing wrong.
-
Not sure where else to post this. . .
What does that even mean, "have you tried increasing the number of IOPS" . . . .
-
something something jumbo frames
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Not sure where else to post this. . .
What does that even mean, "have you tried increasing the number of IOPS" . . . .
goes here...
https://mangolassi.it/topic/11147/i-can-t-even/ -
LOL
HUH increase the number of IOPs, nice.
-
Continued to use a SAN way out of warranty / support options, and has dual controllers failing. Along with didn't make a backup of the VM he needed.
Damn.. that sucks, best practiced he's eschewed, not replacing critical equipment regularly and not checking his backups!
-
@DustinB3403 said in Burned by Eschewing Best Practices:
Continued to use a SAN way out of warranty / support options, and has dual controllers failing. Along with didn't make a backup of the VM he needed.
Damn.. that sucks, best practiced he's eschewed, not replacing critical equipment regularly and not checking his backups!
And using an appliance without being in support. Black box approach has a vendor dependency.
-
He had "important" data in RAID 0 and quick formatted one of the drives with no backup. Then won't accept advice to send the drives to professional service.
