He's right. RAIDs were mind-blowing tech about 15 years ago. Apple included the ability to make RAIDs right in the OS. But the chance of failure gets multiplied by the number of drives you have. Without expensive and complex software/hardware combinations that automatically replace a failed drive without a hiccough, RAIDs are speed-demons that almost guarantee the early demise of your drive and data. They were great for high-speed applications like web-hosting, where a slower, more reliable drive maintained the backup for when the fast servers died.jloeb wrote:you'd be solving a problem that no longer exists at the cost of losing the whole volume if one physical disk fails. Unless you plan to do full def video work on the same array, JBOD is best.
Think of it; if one out of six drives fail within a certain time period, a six-drive RAID is virtually assured of failing within that same time period. (ok, that's a logical fallacy, but mathematically those odds are real)
But for personal use, a 10,000 rpm drive like the SATA Velociraptor is probably faster than most RAIDs, with far greater reliability. Those didn't exist in the heyday of RAID tech. There may still be a great demand for RAIDs, but my experience with them only cemented my resolve never to touch another one. (all three failed within a year of their deployment) Those big drive enclosures with 6 drives are best, IMO, as JBODs.
Shooshie