Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?
-
@notverypunny said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
@scottalanmiller said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
@notverypunny said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
"Planning" along these lines is the only reason I can think of the veeam agent being a hard requirement
NONE of this is based on planning, at all. This is 100% politics and the OP has no say in it. It is a non-technical mandate from powers on high that are not considering any business need or ramifications.
Agree 100%... The road to hell is paved with good intentions; wanting backups is never a bad thing, trying to do them like this is just asking for trouble.
Not sure that this is good intentions. My guess is departmental fighting over a budget. But who knows.
-
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this but i noticed someone mention Off Site Cloud Storage, thats a good option but depending on the data change rate he will need to consider upload speeds on the connection.
In the UK some of our sites only have 3MB Down and 1MB up
so uploading anything would take a months -
@hobbit666 said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
Not sure if anyone has mentioned this but i noticed someone mention Off Site Cloud Storage, thats a good option but depending on the data change rate he will need to consider upload speeds on the connection.
We ran the numbers, it's both not an option due to their tech requirements, but the cost would be way too high. The annual storage would be as much as their capital limits. Even on Wasabi.
-
@hobbit666 said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
In the UK some of our sites only have 3MB Down and 1MB up so uploading anything would take a months
That's the speeds I'm getting on AT&T commercial, dedicated, enterprise 50/50 fiber!
-
@scottalanmiller thought i would mention as it's happened here.
"Lets upload to the cloud" Hold on with the amount and speeds we would be constantly uploading file 24/7 -
@hobbit666 said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
@scottalanmiller thought i would mention as it's happened here.
"Lets upload to the cloud" Hold on with the amount and speeds we would be constantly uploading file 24/7Yeah, that's a huge issue, too. 170TB even over a 50Mb/s dedicated line isn't fast
-
I've got a symmetric gig connection in the new office. We could probably make that work.
-
@DustinB3403 said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
I've got a symmetric gig connection in the new office. We could probably make that work.
I have symmetrical 50Mb/s, but I only reliably get 3Mb/s
-
@scottalanmiller said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
@hobbit666 said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
@scottalanmiller thought i would mention as it's happened here.
"Lets upload to the cloud" Hold on with the amount and speeds we would be constantly uploading file 24/7Yeah, that's a huge issue, too. 170TB even over a 50Mb/s dedicated line isn't fast
With that kind of data, it's best to have your data cloud only IMO. Then scaling and backup is easier and likely more cost efficient.
Depends on the data of course!
-
@scottalanmiller said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
@DustinB3403 said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
I've got a symmetric gig connection in the new office. We could probably make that work.
I have symmetrical 50Mb/s, but I only reliably get 3Mb/s
Nice to know I am not alone. I can get to 100Mb/s for 3 times the price I pay now. Yeah, right!
-
We run with RAID 6.
Modern RAID controllers have the horsepower and cache RAM that is flash backed to overcome any real parity performance costs.
Rebuild times will be the killer plus some performance cost for a failed disk.
-
@PhlipElder said in Raid10, must use or another Raid limits?:
Modern RAID controllers have the horsepower and cache RAM that is flash backed to overcome any real parity performance costs.
Operationally it would be just fine. It's only recovery time that would be of concern.
