Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Raid for 24 TB

  1. #1
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3

    Raid for 24 TB

    i'm currently building a media server for all of my content and getting rid of 4 external usb HDD's. My question is i'm going to get an 8 port raid controller with 3TB HDD's, with that many drives would it be safer to go raid 6 and lose basically a drive worth of space or go with raid 5. Thank you in advance.

  2. #2
    Trailer Chasing Senior Adragontattoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Northwestern corner of Va. USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol Sector, outer arm of spiral galaxy
    Posts
    5,260
    Depends on much more than what you put in.

    HW Raid or SW Raid/ZFS?
    Only ISP provided, .EDU, .GOV, .MIL e-mail addresses are Classifieds approved. Are you unable to access the Classifieds?
    Click here to find out why!
    The Forum Rules FAQ|
    Classies Rules and Regs
    Prices, slashes and edits
    Quality over Quantity Pictures are NOT req.
    Adopt an animal if you want one, dont use a breeder!

  3. #3
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3
    Hardware raid

  4. #4
    Member Randyman...'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    3,193
    I like RAID-6 with large drives with important data - but I have read the arguments against RAID5/6 and I am slightly intrigued by using RAID10 instead (also has a few drawbacks of its own).

    Will all 24TB be backed up elsewhere? If not - don't even consider it. Backup somewhere, and use a RAID-6 for primary storage. Should be pretty dang solid...

    Randy V - Audio-Dude/Musician/PC Guru/Crazy Guy

    PC#1 (Main Rig) : Lian Li PC-V1010 / P8Z68-V-GEN3 / 3750K @ 4.5GHz + Ven-X / 16GB G.Skill DDR3-1600 / HD5770 "XXX" 1GB / Samsung 830 256GB SSD / (6x) 2TB 5K3000 on Areca ARC1222 in RAID-6 / Seasonic X660 PSU / 2407WFP-HC / RME "Multiface" 38 Ch. Audio I/O / Dynaudio AIR-15 + AIR-BASE-2 Studio Monitors
    PC#2 (Realtime DAW) : Lian-Li PC-K65B / Sabertooth X79 / i7-3820 @ 4.8GHz + TRUE / 8GB RipJaws DDR3-2133 / HD6570 / 120GB Intel 520 / 4x 1TB on Areca ARC-1210 in RAID-5 / RME "HDSPe MADI" 128 Channel Audio I/O / 2x SSL AlphaLink MADI AX / 48 Mic Inputs + Fully-discrete Mic Preamps + 4260Watt PA System with 5x 18" JBL Subs :-)
    NAS#1: NSC-800 ITX Case / Asus P8H61-ITX / i3-2120 / (8x) 1TB 7200.12's in RAID-6 on Areca ARC-1220 Card
    NAS#2: 12TB ReadyNAS Ultra-4+ / (4x) 3TB 5K3000's
    And 7 other i7/i5/C2D/C2Q PC's

  5. #5
    Destroyer of Empires and User Accounts, El Huginator
    Premium Member #3
    First Responders
    thideras's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    31,345
    With that much storage, I would absolutely go with RAID 6. The problem is that you are reaching the raw read error rate of hard drives today, which is around once in every 12tb of data. That means you have a very high change of getting a read error rate while simply rebuilding an array. If you lost a drive in RAID 5, it would not be able to recover if it got a read error, which could break the array or corrupt data silently. I would seriously consider ZFS for this array as it has the ability to detect corruption better than a RAID array can.
    Desktop: Gigabyte Z77X-UD5H | 3570k | 32 GB | GTX 770 Classified | 1 TB Samsung Evo & 2 TB HDD | Windows 3.1 | 4x 2560x1400 Monitors
    VM Server 1: Dell R710 | 2x L5630 | 96 GB RAM | 8x 300 GB Savvio | IBM M1015 | 34 TB Raw disk | XenServer
    VM Server 2: Dell R710 | 2x L5630 | 96 GB RAM |
    8x 300 GB Savvio | XenServer
    Router: Dell R410 | E5620 | 32 GB RAM | 3x 300 GB | pfsense
    "That's not overkill, or a lot. That's just thiderastic." -txus.palacios
    "Clouds are silent, cold, and wet. Servers are none of these things." -Bobnova

    Current projects: Rackmount Overkill (New) | Little Overkill (New)
    Articles: Rack Mounting 101 | Dell Perc 5/i Throughput Benchmarks
    My Website


    Want to talk directly to all the moderators at once? Call the Mod Hotline!

  6. #6
    New Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    3
    Thank you for the replies, I'm going to try raid 6.

  7. #7
    Trailer Chasing Senior Adragontattoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Northwestern corner of Va. USA, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Sol Sector, outer arm of spiral galaxy
    Posts
    5,260
    Quote Originally Posted by thideras View Post
    With that much storage, I would absolutely go with RAID 6. The problem is that you are reaching the raw read error rate of hard drives today, which is around once in every 12tb of data. That means you have a very high change of getting a read error rate while simply rebuilding an array. If you lost a drive in RAID 5, it would not be able to recover if it got a read error, which could break the array or corrupt data silently. I would seriously consider ZFS for this array as it has the ability to detect corruption better than a RAID array can.

    If you arent going to go with ZFS, at least look at doing to arrays to keep closer to the 12tb line. While not as convenient, it is a much smaller headache then corrupt data.
    Only ISP provided, .EDU, .GOV, .MIL e-mail addresses are Classifieds approved. Are you unable to access the Classifieds?
    Click here to find out why!
    The Forum Rules FAQ|
    Classies Rules and Regs
    Prices, slashes and edits
    Quality over Quantity Pictures are NOT req.
    Adopt an animal if you want one, dont use a breeder!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •