| ▲ | zootboy 2 days ago | |
To be honest, it seems rather silly to go this deep into probability calculations when your N = 4 (hard drives). I can present numerous wildly-differing anecdotes about how single hard drives I have owned have fared. I have some drives that are 20 years old that still apparently work fine. I've had brand new drives silently corrupt sectors after less than a year in use. Trying to put hard numbers to the probability of failures is a fool's errand. Better to simply assume that components will fail over time, and architect your system to handle those failures gracefully. That said, I actually agree with much of the final architecture decisions made by the author. BTRFS raid1 with an offsite copy in a geographically distant area is a pretty good solution for the average person's personal documents. Possible improvements would be: - Multiple offsite copies in different locations - Hardware diversity (differing models of HDD, host PC, power supplies, etc.) - Staggered hardware upgrades on a 5-10 year cycle - Cold storage (offline) copy | ||
| ▲ | nosolace a day ago | parent | next [-] | |
oh it's definitely a bit absurd, but i felt i needed a workout.... hence this post. multiple sites, hardware diversity, staggered upgrades, cold storage, are all really good ways to improve this, as they pull failure events closer to independence | ||
| ▲ | justsomehnguy a day ago | parent | prev [-] | |
3-2-car is still the best model for your Average Joe. | ||