Re: The RAID Shuffle...

--- "Obnoxio The Clown" <obnoxio@hotmail.com> > wrote: >From: "Mr. Anonymous" <mranonnymouse@yahoo.com> >> >>Hello from the intensely-contested electoral state of Florida. > >Lucky old you. > >>I've been shoveling my way through a disaster of a db (inherited from an >>admin whose idea of research was glossy full-page magazine ads) and am >>about >>ready to shift all the dbspaces on a RAID 5 array to a mirroring array. > >So, it's running on Oracle, then? Maybe it's the election commission's database and that's why they're having to recount by hand.... > >>We are currently running 5.1, and the new and old RAID arrays are all >>hardware-based. (The ECCS Synchronix 1000, if you care.) We will not be >>fragmenting (yet) as we're still using 5.1's ROW_ID 'feature'. >> >>Before I do so, any caveats? I've already performed individual backups of >>each dbspace, as well as an overall backup of the config files, etc. > >RAID5 suck lemons, is pants and is for data you want to chuck away. Why not >save load time and just link everything to /dev/null? I must have read it differently than you did. Looked to me like they were moving away from RAID 5. > >My 497 euros. Devaluating the currency already? == "Outlook not so good." That magic 8-ball knows everything! I'll ask about Exchange Server next. _____________________________________________________________ Want a new web-based email account ? ---> http://www.firstlinux.net