Differences between version 7 and predecessor to the previous major change of RAID.
Other diffs: Previous Revision, Previous Author, or view the Annotated Edit History
| Newer page: | version 7 | Last edited on Friday, August 6, 2004 11:42:30 am | by PerryLorier | Revert |
| Older page: | version 5 | Last edited on Saturday, November 16, 2002 1:53:16 am | by MattPurvis | Revert |
@@ -12,9 +12,9 @@
* Easy to implement in software and hardware
* Cheap to implement
* Utilise full disk capacity, no space is wasted storing redundant pages
-http://www.raidarray.eu.com/raid0.html
+http://www.raidarray.eu.com/raid0.html or http://www.acnc.com/raid
.html
!Disadvantages
* If any disk fails, you lose all your data
* Not true [RAID]
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@
!Disadvantages
* Expensive
* Lots of wasted disk space
-* If two disks on opposing arrays die, you loose
the entire array, where 1+0 would require two disks in the same position to die before you loose
the array which is far less probable.
+* If two disks on opposing arrays die, you lose
the entire array, where 1+0 would require two disks in the same position to die before you lose
the array which is far less probable.
http://www.raidarray.eu.com/raid0+1.html
