When you run multiple disks in RAID0, there is an increased risk of failure. This risk is slightly less than the risk of failure for one disk multiplied with the number of disks in the RAID0 Array. However, failure of one disk in the array results in total data loss. Some examples or the increase in risk:
1)Two disks in RAID0, risk of failure of each disk is 1% (0.01). There are three possibilities of failure in the array: disk1 fails, disk2 fails, and both disks fail. Mathematically, this works out as follows: (0.01x0.99 + 0.99x0.01 + 0.01x0.01) = 0.0199 or 1.99%. Thus, risk of failure of one or both disks in the array is almost double of that when you run a single disk.
2)Three disks in RAID0, risk of failure of each disk is 1 (0.01). Same math, with more possibilities results in total risk of failure of 2.97%. Thus, risk of failure of one or more disks in the array is almost triple of that when you run a single disk.
Hope this helps for your decision to go for RAID0 or not. Note that the 1% failure rate is just an example!
Also, we're taking all kinds of risks here with our hardware... so why not go RAID0
1)Two disks in RAID0, risk of failure of each disk is 1% (0.01). There are three possibilities of failure in the array: disk1 fails, disk2 fails, and both disks fail. Mathematically, this works out as follows: (0.01x0.99 + 0.99x0.01 + 0.01x0.01) = 0.0199 or 1.99%. Thus, risk of failure of one or both disks in the array is almost double of that when you run a single disk.
2)Three disks in RAID0, risk of failure of each disk is 1 (0.01). Same math, with more possibilities results in total risk of failure of 2.97%. Thus, risk of failure of one or more disks in the array is almost triple of that when you run a single disk.
Hope this helps for your decision to go for RAID0 or not. Note that the 1% failure rate is just an example!
Also, we're taking all kinds of risks here with our hardware... so why not go RAID0
Folding for Team Just Be Cause
(13 items) |
|
Folding for Team Just Be Cause
(13 items) |
