Me and my friend were discussing this the other day about how he said RAID is no longer needed. He said it was due to how big SSDs have gotten and that apparently you can replace sectors within them if a problem occurs which is why having an array is not needed.

I replied with the fact that arrays allow for redundancy that create a faster uptime if there are issues and drive needs to be replaced. And depending on what you are doing, that is more valuable than just doing the new thing. Especially because RAID allows redundancy that can replicate lost data if needed depending on the configuration.

What do you all think?

  • PirateJesus@lemmy.today
    0·
    9 months ago

    SSDs still have component bottlenecks that can kill the whole drive, same as hard drives.

    Also, 3-2-1 is far superior to RAID, but having RAID on top of that is nice.

    • Maintain three copies of your data: This includes the original data and at least two copies.
    • Use two different types of media for storage: Store your data on two distinct forms of media to enhance redundancy.
    • Keep at least one copy off-site: To ensure data safety, have one backup copy stored in an off-site location, separate from your primary data and on-site backups. https://www.veeam.com/blog/321-backup-rule.html
    • dbilitated@aussie.zone
      1·
      9 months ago

      3-2-1 is for backup, RAID is also for availability, eg your domain server not going down in case of drive failure. good point though.