Re: [ARSCLIST] IDE RAID storage?

[Dave Meyers <audio101@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

-----Original Message-----
From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
[mailto:ARSCLIST@xxxxxxx] On Behalf Of andy kolovos
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2004 11:10 AM
To: ARSCLIST@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] IDE RAID storage?

I was going to leave this post alone but now I must speak up. IDE does not
handle large data transfers well. It just is not the greatest file transfer
system...SATA has MANY problems as well. SCSI even the older system just are
far more robust when it comes to handling data transfers. Especially large
chunks of data as is Audio and more so Video! And if you have to stream
large amounts of A/V in real time then SCSI just is far more reliable with
less errors. IDE sytsems can get so bunged up during a transfer that you end
up with glitches. This is rare, but it can happen. SCSI systems have a
degree of error checking built in them that is better then IDE and does a
better job of handling the data. Plus the SUSTAINED transfer rate of a
comparable SCSI drive is better then IDE by far.

 If you worried about the cost. There are plenty of older SCSI RAID systems
out there that can be hand for cheap. Plenty of older compaq systems can be
hand for 50-100 per RAID cabnit plus drives and for a little bit more you
can find yourself a nice U2W or U160 system.

 I picked up a U160 Gateway/ALR 3 drive RAID cage and 3x IBM 18gig 10K RPM
drives Plus Adaptec raid controller card for under $300.00 total. I was
getting sustained transfer rates around 70-80K/sec which is plenty for 24
tracks of 24 bit 96K audio all at once.

 If safer data storage is really what your after. There is no substitute for
tape back up. Drives are unraliable. They WILL fail at some point. Then CAN
fail for a great many reasons. Having multiple tape back up copys stored in
safe storage is the only answer at this point.

 Lucas film has one of the most eleaborate tape back up systems I have ever
seen! 2 redundant tape robotic libraries continually back up many terrabytes
of data! 


 I have lost many hours of work due to failed drives. Even brand new drives
right out of the box I have had fail with in the first few days... Drives,
just don't trust em!


Dave



Mike and others--

What I'm looking for is a high level of data redundancy and a method of data
storage where the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.  RAID level 1,
10/1+0 and 5 seem to promise this, and IDE-based RAID seems to do so at a
much lower cost per gig  than SCSI RAID and the file storage servers being
offered by companies such as Dell.  I haven't looked into SATA RAID.

I'm tending toward RAID 5 because of its seeming robustness when compared to
the other options.  I also gather with RAID 5 storage capacity is at around
2/3 the total size of all the discs in the array as opposed to 1/2 the total
size with RAID level 1, 10/1+0.

But, in short, what I'm most concerned with is safer data storage.

Having already lost a HDD (thankfully after the data were transferred!),
single disc storage, even when dupicated on additonal HDDs, makes me
nervous.

Thanks,

andy
*********************************
Andy Kolovos
Archivist/Folklorist
Vermont Folklife Center
P.O. Box 442
Middlebury, VT 05753
(802) 388-4964
akolovos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.vermontfolklifecenter.org