![]() ![]() I think in reality, you probably have an amount of data you need to store in mind knowing that amount might make it easier to think about system design.Īs I wrote I try to achieve the impossible result : ++storage ++perf -costĪt least I'm pragmatic (and experienced), I know can only tend to that result. If you are maximizing for some combination of capacity and data dependability, you are probably best off with roughly a half dozen drives, which gives you tolerance to 1 to 3 faults (depending on how you set it up), and somewhere between 50% and 85% storage efficiency. Which is how I run my system at home, even if professionally I know that this is not dependable enough for high-value data. ![]() ![]() Which means buying at least 2 disk drives (at which point your efficiency is 50%, and you are only protected against a single fault). Today, there is not much of a niche left for 2.5" drives, except in a narrow segment for medium-performance per $.Īnother argument: If you like your data, you need redundancy. ![]() Performance? In that case go SSD all the way. What are you trying to maximize? Storage capacity? In that case, the highest capacity disks are 3.5" drives. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |