<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Major failure in fail town</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mattf.ca/hardware/major-failure-in-fail-town/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mattf.ca/hardware/major-failure-in-fail-town/</link>
	<description>Internet Marketing Dundada</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 03:17:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matt Fraser</title>
		<link>http://mattf.ca/hardware/major-failure-in-fail-town/comment-page-1/#comment-4</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Fraser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:04:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/mattf.ca/?p=4#comment-4</guid>
		<description>Yeah it was hardware raid, didn&#039;t have enough drives for raid 5.  It sucks, but it was a lesson :P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah it was hardware raid, didn&#8217;t have enough drives for raid 5.  It sucks, but it was a lesson <img src='http://mattf.ca/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_razz.gif' alt=':P' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Volomike</title>
		<link>http://mattf.ca/hardware/major-failure-in-fail-town/comment-page-1/#comment-3</link>
		<dc:creator>Volomike</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:57:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://localhost/mattf.ca/?p=4#comment-3</guid>
		<description>Yikes, Raid1 blows. Use Raid5 if you can afford to lose a little bit of disk space for writing the parity information. Only requires 3 drives, minimum, and it is suggested to use 3 physical drives, not logical ones. I&#039;m also a fan of hardware-based RAID, not software-based. Software-based just made me feel a little uneasy. So, get a controller card that supports RAID in the BIOS of the card when the server boots. With Raid5, you can yank a drive hot (usually, but depends on the manufacturer&#039;s solution) and the server still runs. Note that depends -- some RAID5 implementations require that you turn the PC off before removing the drive, although I would think that would be dumb. So, I purchase hot-swappable RAID5, instead.

And yes -- backups are super critical.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yikes, Raid1 blows. Use Raid5 if you can afford to lose a little bit of disk space for writing the parity information. Only requires 3 drives, minimum, and it is suggested to use 3 physical drives, not logical ones. I&#8217;m also a fan of hardware-based RAID, not software-based. Software-based just made me feel a little uneasy. So, get a controller card that supports RAID in the BIOS of the card when the server boots. With Raid5, you can yank a drive hot (usually, but depends on the manufacturer&#8217;s solution) and the server still runs. Note that depends &#8212; some RAID5 implementations require that you turn the PC off before removing the drive, although I would think that would be dumb. So, I purchase hot-swappable RAID5, instead.</p>
<p>And yes &#8212; backups are super critical.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
