I did a thing, have a quick Linux question
-
Ya depending how this goes I could definately see myself going that route.
So many wasted resources with windows.
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
Ya depending how this goes I could definately see myself going that route.
So many wasted resources with windows.
I've got a Linux ISO with its name on it... Just gotta find the time to get one last backup done, lol.
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
Ya depending how this goes I could definately see myself going that route.
So many wasted resources with windows.
You aren't wrong
-
Are you able to group harddrives in a non raid format with linux?
Like a stablebit drive pool for linux kind of thing?
Versus making raid 0
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
Are you able to group harddrives in a non raid format with linux?
Like a stablebit drive pool for linux kind of thing?
Versus making raid 0
I know that you're asking @dafyre but just use ZFS. Software raid on Linux in the modern world has very little overhead.
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
Are you able to group harddrives in a non raid format with linux?
Like a stablebit drive pool for linux kind of thing?
Versus making raid 0
Why would you do this, when you could use MD Raid and have a highly resilient solution?
-
-
I've got my important media and my "who the heck cares" media.
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
I've got my important media and my "who the heck cares" media.
the Who the heck media you could still put onto RAID0 array.
-
I'd rather lose 1 disk and 2TB versus lose 1 disk and 6TB
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
I've got my important media and my "who the heck cares" media.
You raid 0 for speed
-
RAID0 would give you a lot of read/write performance while not caring if you lose a drive (as the data is gone anyways)
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
I'd rather lose 1 disk and 2TB versus lose 1 disk and 6TB
How many TB do you have that you can't lose?
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
I'd rather lose 1 disk and 2TB versus lose 1 disk and 6TB
I don't get this concept...
RAID0 you'd lose it all, no RAID you'd have no "protection" of a drive failing either.
So unless you mean to mirror the drives in a separate mechanism for protection, while not getting any benefit of RAID, you have a backup.
-
I'd say 8-10TB
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
I'd say 8-10TB
and how much total? Also how quickly are you going to expand?
-
Well what are we talking here, for me it would be (atleast) 3 2TB drives, so you are saying make 1 giant 6TB raid 0 correct?
So 1 drive dies I lose 6TB
Or are you saying make 3 2TB Raid 0's so that if I lose 1 I only lose 2TB
Can I then make it appear to be one disk though?And please keep in mind there might just not be a linux thing I dont know.
For example in Windows I have stablebit drive pool pooling my drives so that if I lose 1 drive I only lose the data on that one drive.
-
Total (used and unused) I'm sitting at 22TB.
And I'd say I'm expanding fast enough that I felt I needed 22TB, have 6TB free, had prob 12TB+ free 6 months ago.
Offloading some junk to the cloud though currently.
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
Well what are we talking here, for me it would be (atleast) 3 2TB drives, so you are saying make 1 giant 6TB raid 0 correct?
So 1 drive dies I lose 6TB
Or are you saying make 3 2TB Raid 0's so that if I lose 1 I only lose 2TB
Can I then make it appear to be one disk though?And please keep in mind there might just not be a linux thing I dont know.
For example in Windows I have stablebit drive pool pooling my drives so that if I lose 1 drive I only lose the data on that one drive.
My thought was if you have 2TB you can't lose out of 10, put everything in a raid 0 and then buy a small NAS backup for the 2 TB.
-
@Sparkum said in I did a thing, have a quick Linux question:
Well what are we talking here, for me it would be (atleast) 3 2TB drives, so you are saying make 1 giant 6TB raid 0 correct?
So 1 drive dies I lose 6TB
Or are you saying make 3 2TB Raid 0's so that if I lose 1 I only lose 2TB
Can I then make it appear to be one disk though?And please keep in mind there might just not be a linux thing I dont know.
For example in Windows I have stablebit drive pool pooling my drives so that if I lose 1 drive I only lose the data on that one drive.
I'm just trying to understand what you are trying to do.
Without RAID, you won't be able to present multiple disks to any OS (unless it's FakeRAID and Windows) and show it as one drive.
