greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
On May 29, 2015 1:58:23 AM EDT, Per Jessen <per@computer.org> wrote:
jdd wrote:
Le 28/05/2015 20:45, Per Jessen a écrit :
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Actually, IMO, an rsync job is safer than raid, it covers more failure modes, but not as fast.
It depends on how you define "safe". In my book, the longer a system runs without two identical copies, the less safe it is. There is no way an rsync copy will ever catch up with a RAID1 mirror.
problem with raid is that nothing verify disk failures on unused data. the raid purpose is uninterrupted running, not data saving.
Absolutely.
What is being said?
Speaking for myself, I was only agreeing to the last sentence: "the raid purpose is uninterrupted running, not data saving.". -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.1°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org