TMG-L Archives

Archiver > TMG > 2001-10 > 1002043992


From: "Richard J. Otter" <>
Subject: RE: [TMG] OT- OS Choice & RAID-1
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2001 10:33:12 -0700
In-Reply-To: <3BB9CFD9.DE4C15A0@reigelridge.com>


RAID 1 can protect against disk hardware failures but this is not the kind
of protection you need. For instance, if you accidentally type delete *.*,
your files will be deleted on both mirrored drives. Likewise, if the power
goes out at a bad time, the FAT file system on both drives will be
corrupted.

Now you could make the case that since the C: drive is itself more reliable
now, you could simply make backups copies of your DB using the TMG bakupo
function and leave them on your C: drive.
However, a regular backup routine which includes making multiple copies to
an off-site location is the only method I'd trust with my data.

If your concerned about power outrages, etc, then I'd definitly ditch the
DOS based Win95/98/ME with their FAT file systems. The NTFS filesystem fond
in WinNRT, 2K and XP is far, far more robust. (Haven't had a single
filesystem problem I can remember in ~ 5 years.)

If you're concerned with reliability, go with Win2K if you don't want to be
an early adopter of XP. Although, given MS's excellent track record with its
Win2K release, I'd personally go for XP.

-----Original Message-----
From: Terry Reigel [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2001 7:32 AM
To:
Subject: [TMG] OT- OS Choice & RAID-1


Off Topic - Please delete if you are not interested in technical stuff about
computer innards.

Well, I guess it's off topic, but it's really running TMG with a fairly
large dataset that's my "excuse" for buying a new computer. I know there are
some people with experience on these issues on the list, but perhaps it
would be best if you reply to do so off list.

I'm talking to a local shop about building a new system - a 1.7G P-IV w/ 512
M RAM. My supplier is strongly urging me not to buy XP - primarily because
it's new and bound to have problems. He's suggesting installing my current
copy of Win98 SE instead. I'm drawn by his argument, given MS's track
record, but would on the other hand like to get improved stability. Anyone
have any thoughts?

Also, he's suggesting a pair of 40G HDs running in a RAID-1 mirrored
configuration. This would replace my current practice of using a second
smaller drive and a Bat file with Xcopy to manually make backups of data
files only, as an intermediate backup between copies I make to CD-R. Anybody
have any knowledge or experience with RAID-1 on a workstation? How much
trouble is it? Do disk utilities like Norton and PartitionMagic work with
them? Any idea of what percentage of HD failures occur on the drives
themselves as opposed to the elements that would be shared in a RAID system?
It seems like my current manual system provides a bit more independence, and
hence reliability, though still being subject to common risks like power
surges, and also the risk of the user failing to use it often enough.

Any thoughts welcome.

Terry Reigel

______________________________

This thread: