External storage recommendations for Linux?

Post #296,467 by slugbug 11/26/07 7:59:46 PM Reply	External storage recommendations for Linux? So, I'm over on newegg.com looking at external storage. Does anyone have any brand recommendations? Which vendor(s) are supporting Linux solidly? Any to avoid? Thanks in advance for any input you may have. -Slugbug
Post #296,468 by Another Scott 11/26/07 8:30:40 PM Reply	eSATA is nice. It's fast - much faster than USB or Ethernet. I've got one of [link\|http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16817332013&Tpk=venus%2besata\|these] with a couple of SATA 500 GB hard drives. The reviews mention some magic that needed to be done to get Linux to see all the drives, but I haven't messed with that. It works fine with Winders. It has a couple of [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=286079\|minor issues] - e.g. I don't think it's trivial to boot from them. HTH a bit. Good luck! Cheers, Scott. [link\|http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=006978452673906630972%3A_5xhnlvpsn4\|IWeThey Custom Search Engine]
Post #296,470 by crazy 11/26/07 9:03:43 PM Reply	Firewire good / USB bad I have one of these on my Linux box: [link\|http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=322\|http://www.wdc.com/e...s.asp?DriveID=322] WD My Book I tried using both USB 2 and Firewire. Firewire was 4 times as fast using a miniscule amount of CPU. USB consumes a huge amount of CPU. No special drivers or magic, just shows up as a SCSI device on my Ubuntu system. I have 1/2 a dozen systems rsyncing to that particular device to use as a twice a day backup. Saved my ass a couple of times already.
Post #296,474 by bepatient 11/26/07 11:47:26 PM Reply	Agree...firewire is better than usb2 but both work Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #296,485 by slugbug 11/27/07 1:23:32 PM Reply	Thank you, everyone! Really appreciate the input. One other question: what level of RAID protection is best if my goal is to split the drive space for backup purposes? RAID 0,1,5? Still researching.... My thanks, Slugbug
Post #296,491 by Another Scott 11/27/07 5:07:10 PM Reply	RAID is always a compromise. RAID is always a compromise among cost, redundancy, and speed. [link\|http://www.acnc.com/04_01_00.html\|RAID 0] is striping. No redundancy, but higher performance than a single drive. [link\|http://www.acnc.com/04_01_01.html\|RAID 1] is mirroring and duplexing. 100% redundancy, but 50% of disks are effectively lost. [link\|http://www.acnc.com/04_01_05.html\|RAID 5] is a good compromise of performance and reliability. It has the most complex controller, and requires at least 3 drives to implement. If you're doing on-line live backups, RAID 1 is a simple choice. You don't have to think about it. There's a lot more at ACNC. HTH a bit. Good luck! Cheers, Scott. [link\|http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=006978452673906630972%3A_5xhnlvpsn4\|IWeThey Custom Search Engine]
Post #296,492 by slugbug 11/27/07 5:44:55 PM Reply	Good info... My thanks... Seems like RAID 1 is what I need for now. Use RAID 5 at work. Will just buy a bit more storage to compensate. Useful info on the ACNC site. Appreciated! -Slugbug
Post #296,494 by crazy 11/27/07 7:08:27 PM Reply	Yup, RAID1 is simplest SATA Disks are so fast and cheap a pair in an enclosure seems to be what you are looking for. Hmm. You haven't said the actual amount of space you need though.
Post #296,495 by slugbug 11/27/07 7:16:35 PM Reply	Probably 1TB x 2 (RAID1), if possible... otherwise, can survive with 500GB x 2 (RAID 1) and do multiple configs. My $0.02. -Slugbug
Post #296,496 by Andrew Grygus 11/27/07 7:21:50 PM 11/27/07 7:25:52 PM Reply	Oops - thinking of RAID-5 Yes, with RAID-1 you lose half, RAID-5 you lose 1/3. [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx] Edited by Andrew Grygus Nov. 27, 2007, 07:25:52 PM EST Expand All History
Post #296,505 by crazy 11/27/07 10:28:05 PM Reply	Assuming 3 disks Yup, you lose 1 disk out of however many disks you have in the raid set. As you add disks, you gain speed because you have more spindles, and both streaming reads / writes get faster. But rewrites get dramatically slower as you add disks. So it really depends on your usage pattern of whether more disks are better or worse for you. Of course, there are many other variables to think about if you were really pushing for performance.

Welcome to IWETHEY!