Question Raid 10 vs: 2 RAID 0 arrays. Preventing data loss is top priority.

[RCC 1]

I am a home user that has video and music that can not be replaced. A 10 yr collection.
This will be my first time to create RAID. My only options are 0 1 5 and 10. I have 4 10TB drives
and eventually I will have close to 20TB of data. Any solution must include my 4 10TB drives I do not have a deep wallet.

My primary RAID will be busy fairly often during the day with adds, modifications and deletes.

When dealing with 10TB of data I need RAID 0 for performance.

With RAID 10 if I lose both drives in one of the pairs I have lost all my data.
With raid 10 all 4 drives will be busy most of the day. The more time during the day the
raid 10 is busy I increase my chance of total data loss.

I am not saving business data that must be sent to the redundant array immediately.

My current thinking is to have 2 RAID 0 arrays and the backup RAID will only be used every 24 hours to
deal with deletes, mods and adds. This can be accomnplished using the SyncBackSE windows app.
I think this decreases the chance of total data loss. Do not consider a 100 yr flood, direct lightning hit, or fire.

A new psu, mobo and UPS will be used. I have yet to learn how to use APC UPS and the Serial Shutdown software. Hopefully
all of my data I/0 tasks will shutdown quickly after receiving a Windows system request to shutdown.

All helpful input will be greatly appreciated.

This man was never a IT data admin but I did help create the first factory automation software and first global VOIP database a very long time ago.

 

[USAFRet]

"Preventing data loss is top priority."

This is done with an actual backup routine, outside any RAID array type.

The general concept is 3-2-1.
3 copies, on at least 2 different media, at least 1 offsite or otherwise inaccessible.

RAID of any type beyond RAID 0 (and RAID 0 is even worse) is only for physical drive failure. It does little or nothing for actual data protection.

 

[RCC 1]

"at least 1 offsite..."
I said I was a home user and was hoping for a response tailored to home users. I do thank you for your response and everything you said is true and performed in business or military.

 

[USAFRet]

When dealing with 10TB of data I need RAID 0 for performance.

And with that, you absolutely NEED a real backup routine.
( I question the actual need for the RAID 0, but whatever)

 

[USAFRet]

"at least 1 offsite..."
I said I was a home user and was hoping for a response tailored to home users. I do thank you for your response and everything you said is true and performed in business or military.

With my data here, I am also a 'home user'.

I have a copy of critical life changing data in a couple of drives, in a desk drawer at work.

Fire/flood/theft/etc....all of them won't go away at the same time.

Stored in the cloud somewhere works as well.

 

[RCC 1]

I have no offsite location I am retired. I will look into storing my data in the cloud if it is affordable.
In my hood the most likely way I will lose my data is when a person breaks into my apt and steals all my computer hardware. 10 yrs ago in this very large apt complex I lost $5K in hardware.

I will look into cloud storage. Thank you.

Raid 0 will allow me to perform backups much faster.

 

[USAFRet]

Raid 0 will allow me to perform backups much faster.

Not really.

Performance depends on the slowest device in the chain.
A slow HDD writing to an uber fast whatever is only done at the speed of the 'slow HDD'.

My nightly Incremental backup images to my NAS box take maybe 2 minutes per drive.

RAID 0 is vastly overrated as a performance enhancer. Especially if you're looking at solid state drives.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Raid 0 will allow me to perform backups much faster.

RAID 0 also increases the chance of data loss by the number of drives in the RAID array. If you're using two drives, you double the chance of data loss.

Unless you're generate a crap ton of data every time you start your backup routine, the only painful time is in the beginning when you're doing everything. Any decent backup routine will only update what's different. And RAID 0 does absolutely nothing to help cloud backup, unless you have like 10Gb fiber.

 

[USAFRet]

If you're using two drives, you double the chance of data loss.

Actually, triple.
Each drive, + the RAID controller.

 

[RCC 1]

"Performance depends on the slowest device in the chain." I agree.
All my drives are the same speed.

2 10TB drives are cheaper than a single 20TB.

"RAID 0 is vastly overrated as a performance enhancer. Especially if you're looking at solid state drives."
As I said originally I do not have a deep wallet. A single 20TB SSD? Two of my drives in raid zero will give me about 350 MB/s.

"RAID 0 is vastly overrated as a performance enhancer" Raid 0 doubles disk I/O.

"RAID 0 also increases the chance of data loss by the number of drives in the RAID array" This is true.
The longer it takes to move data also increases your chance of a disk failure.

"Each drive, + the RAID controller." Do not forget psu failure and other potential hardware failures.

I never said RAID 0 will give me data protection. However the longer it takes to move the data you increase the chance of data loss.

 

[DSzymborski]

Using RAID for backup of multimedia files is like using a screwdriver to hammer a nail. Yes, it sort of works, but the benefits of a RAID don't remotely manifest themselves in tasks like these and in most things, it's less complex and more effectively to just use the proper tool, a multi-layered backup regimen.

Even the best case scenario, which you're adding 5 TB a day of new content or something, isn't that great for something like this because you'll have bottlenecks somewhere with this type of data. If you're backing up a file server/media server, you should be using delta backups, which check for changes and only back up things that have been changed since the last backup. My media server is 22 TB and nd I can't remember the last time it took more than 15 minutes to execute (at 7 AM every morning) the backup to my backup server. There's no RAID advantage here and I'm streaming things to me from home all over the country depending on where I'm traveling.

 

[hotaru.hino]

I never said RAID 0 will give me data protection. However the longer it takes to move the data you increase the chance of data loss.

This is like saying the longer you're on the road driving a car, the higher the chance you'll have an accident. So you'll do things like drive aggressively, strip the car of things to make it accelerate faster, etc.

You're trading one minor issue for a major one.

 

[USAFRet]

2 10TB drives are cheaper than a single 20TB.

2x 10 TB drives, 1 as an actual backup of the other, is safer than a RAID 1 consisting of the 2x 10TB drives.

"Performance depends on the slowest device in the chain." I agree.
All my drives are the same speed.

But you're looking at a RAID 0 as a speed thing?

3-2-1...
I'm out...

 

[DSzymborski]

I never said RAID 0 will give me data protection. However the longer it takes to move the data you increase the chance of data loss.

You *are* aware that a proper backup doesn't mean completely overwriting all the existing files every time, right? After the initial backup to a second drive, the time difference goes from small to irrelevant.

We get lots and lots of people coming here with mucked up RAIDs that caused them to lose data. I can't remember the last time we've had someone come here for help with a proper backup regime that caused them to lose data.

Your thinking on this is exactly backwards; you are maximizing the chances that lose your data in return for imagined gains in irrelevant areas. That's your choice, but don't say that literally everyone here isn't warning you.

People worry about magnets, floods, and fires, but nothing has cost as much lost data in the history of computer as companies that made RAID easily accessible to the general population.

 

[DSzymborski]

This is like saying the longer you're on the road driving a car, the higher the chance you'll have an accident. So you'll do things like drive aggressively, strip the car of things to make it accelerate faster, etc.

You're trading one minor issue for a major one.

I like to drive to the grocery store at 120 mph to minimize my chances at getting into an accident. All those suckers going 40 are risking their life for three times as long.

 

[deesider]

I have no offsite location I am retired. I will look into storing my data in the cloud if it is affordable.
In my hood the most likely way I will lose my data is when a person breaks into my apt and steals all my computer hardware. 10 yrs ago in this very large apt complex I lost $5K in hardware.

I will look into cloud storage. Thank you.

Raid 0 will allow me to perform backups much faster.

Here's a review of some cloud backup providers: https://arstechnica.com/information...m-top-cloud-backup-services-worth-your-money/

For 10 TB you'll probably need to go with Backblaze at $70 a year. For irreplaceable files it's a bargain.

Depending on your internet speed it'll take from 1 day to 2 weeks to upload...

 

[RCC 1]

I truly appreciate the last few comments. They were helpful.

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think recording four 4K movies concurrently does require the performance of raid 0. Yes raid 0 doubles your disk I/O.

I am not searching for a reason to double my disk I/O.

I am not happy yet because I realize I do need a offsite solution. My ISP gives me about 25KB/sec upload so a cloud situation is not possible.

You folks have taught me a lot.

Tom's Hardware people rock.

 

[USAFRet]

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think recording four 4K movies concurrently does require the performance of raid 0. Yes raid 0 doubles your disk I/O.

Recording from what source?

 

[RCC 1]

From TV and streaming apps. I will use Kodi and its associated apps.

I agree one raid 0 and then 2 20TB drives would decrease my chance greatly of losing data. The second 20TB would be my offsite storage.

Perhaps I have solved my offsite storage for this hood. Hide the drive in my empty laundry room. You would be surprised when a Glok is put to the back of your head for a dead shot kill how quickly you will give up everything. They never look in your storage/laundry room.

I thank you for continuing to give good advice.

This has been a very humbling experience for me.

 

[hotaru.hino]

Please correct me if I am wrong but I think recording four 4K movies concurrently does require the performance of raid 0. Yes raid 0 doubles your disk I/O.

My golden standard 4K 60 FPS HDR video (which is https://4kmedia.org/sony-camping-in-nature-4k-demo/) averages around 76Mbps. That's less than 10 megabytes per second.

Most hard drives that are around 2TB or higher in capacity can easily sustain 100 megabytes per second. Depending on how the data is sent to the hard drive, 4 4K streams should be easily doable.

I am not happy yet because I realize I do need a offsite solution. My ISP gives me about 25KB/sec upload so a cloud situation is not possible.

Offsite is literally anywhere not in your home. Have a trusted friend keep a copy. Get a storage unit. Whatever.

 

[RCC 1]

a 4K video is only 7.6 MB/sec?
So a 4K 60 minute video is only 456 MB?.

I am looking at a file on my drive that is HD and not 4k. A 60 minute recording and the file size is 3.6GB.

I believe your number and I can not explain the large discrepancy. A 60 minute recording of Austin City Limits on PBS.

 

[DSzymborski]

Off-site shouldn't be your *only* backup.

You can't directly compare sizes like that because there's no standardized bitrate. He was illustrating a point.

And you're still not grasping that it doesn't make it faster in a meaningful way. Once again, maintaining a backup does *not* mean that you back up the entire drive every single time.

Imagine you want an offline backup of a 10 TB drive to another drive. Yes, the one-time initial backup won't be super fast. But if you plug in that backup drive in a month to back up the 10 TB primary drive, you don't simply back up the entire 10 TB drive again *unless it's now 10 TB of entirely different files*. You use software that does delta copying, meaning it only runs a quick comparison of your primary drive with the backup drive and only updates the backup drive with the *changes* which will be much smaller. I can't imagine that you simply delete your entire media collection and start over every time between backups.

All a RAID will do on the positive side in this use case is make that initial backup a bit faster, just that one time. After that, it's only the downside of RAID.

The most likely result is that you lose your data at some point. RAID can be very problematic at times even for experienced users. For a user trying to use RAID 0 without even fully comprehending the benefits and risk of RAID at the start is just an epic disaster waiting to happen. We see this a lot here: people who have no business using a RAID using a RAID and then coming back three months later wanting us to tell them how to recover all the data they lost. Don't join this club. I would be much happier with you having all your data in six months than if you came back here in six months and we had to tell you that the data you lost is gone.

 

[RCC 1]

I will have a backup and eventually a offline backup that I will store in storage room.
If a F3 tornado with a 3 minute warning happens I will be dead. If my data is lost due to a apt burglary
at gunpoint I will resist and die.

He was telling me that my disk I/O requirement does not warrant a raid 0. Pay attention.

I am grasping and I feel like I am now in state felony/federal trial where I am guilty before my trial starts.
Whatever.
If you took the time to read my words you know that I will be using SyncBackSE.

With my numbers I have explained that I have a need for my source drive to be raid 0. My backup and offline drives should be a single drive.

"The most likely result is that you lose your data at some point." You are vert arrogant and not helpful.
Do you get your kicks from assuming a new user is a idiot?

I want to thank the peeps that have been helpful.

I remember way back in the 90's before Tom sold this site. Tom's place and AnandTech had friendly members.
Yes I am the man that re-coded the Perl script for the AnandTech distributed computing before some of you probably stopped having a need to use diapers.

If I had a hardware issue I would come to Tom's place. Anybody here remember the first man to be busted for using business servers for DC? Everyone on AnandTech donated as much as possible for his legal defense fund.

Back in the 90s people were truly helpful and kind.

The friendly and helpful people know who they are, As for sickos you will always be a miserable person.

Wow!! 28 years later I am receiving treatment as if I am on trial.

It goes without saying I will never be on this forum again.
ADIOS

 

[ex_bubblehead]

And with that this thread no longer has any use. Closing.