Welcome to the Lounge

fgs19639-May-23 8:00

fgs1963

9-May-23 8:00

Member 14968771 wrote:
I have SEVERAL RAID 5 in my system.

Several RAID 5 arrays?

Member 14968771 wrote:
I am ABSOLUTELY , positively sure I did not play with the RAID HDD where my
good , working OS resides.

Don't they recommend against RAID for OS boots

RedDk9-May-23 9:01

RedDk

9-May-23 9:01

This is the Lounge. You are more likely to get an answer to your question here: Hardware & Devices Discussion Boards[^]. Everything is "wrong" here.

obermd9-May-23 9:06

obermd

9-May-23 9:06

I bet the RAID you thought was all data also contains the system boot loader. I made this mistake when I set up my server.

dandy729-May-23 10:01

dandy72

9-May-23 10:01

Member 14968771 wrote:
I was under , apparently wrong, impression that
RAID allows for "hot replacement" of FAULTY drive...

That's my understanding as well. And hot replacement is also part of the SATA spec.

In light of that, why did you power down anything at all?

k50549-May-23 10:32

k5054

9-May-23 10:32

Member 14968771 wrote:
I was under , apparently wrong, impression that
RAID allows for "hot replacement" of FAULTY drive...

Not quite. The drive interface must also support hot swap for that, too. So for example if you had a RAID configured on an old IDE system, you would need to power down the system to replace the drives. But hot-swap IDE drive enclosures were available, so you'd probably use one of those, instead, if hot swap was important to you.

Keep Calm and Carry On

charlieg9-May-23 10:55

charlieg

9-May-23 10:55

Professionally, I would use RAID for performance but *never* for data retention. The fail recovery process is so specific with the oem as to make it not practical. I'd not wager my paycheck on it.

Years ago, I inherited a development project that utilized very high end raids. The development raid lost a controller board. But it had redundant controller boards, so we're okay, right? fail safe, etc. Nope. Apparently the scheme of talking to the RAID 5 drives was controller specific meaning the redundancy was useless. I had to replace two controller boards, reformat the RAID 5, restore backups, etc.

The sales guy came by a few months later wanting to know why I cancelled all of our orders... either it's redundant or it isn't.

Engineering lesson - when developing a system that has to have high reliability, do not depend on promises. Budget some time and money and break things. Verify the sales brochure.

Charlie Gilley

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759

Has never been more appropriate.

Nelek9-May-23 11:34

Nelek

9-May-23 11:34

charlieg wrote:
Engineering lesson - when developing a system that has to have high reliability, do not depend on promises. Budget some time and money and break things. Verify the sales brochure.

M.D.V.

If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.

k50549-May-23 11:52

k5054

9-May-23 11:52

charlieg wrote:
Professionally, I would use RAID for performance but never for data retention. The fail recovery process is so specific with the oem as to make it not practical. I'd not wager my paycheck on it.

Also, RAID doesn't protect from human error. If you delete something, its gone from everywhere. Similarly, a bad controller can write garbage all over your RAID, leaving you out of luck if you don't have your data backed up off system. Preferably off site, in case of fire, flood, pillage, etc.

Keep Calm and Carry On

theoldfool10-May-23 1:37

theoldfool

10-May-23 1:37

Well, there are RAIDs and then there are RAIDs. We have an old, as in 2012, server with hardware RAID, battery backup. 5 mirrors. The system runs 24/7 (server OS VM moved to newer system). We have had 2 drives (SAS) fail in all that time. Installed new drives without powering off, stuff carried on. System runs ESXi installed on one of the mirrors where a drive failed. RAID = hardware protection only.
And yes, I agree; Full testing during system install/build to ensure recovery. Untested mirror = no mirror.
Never used software RAID on the motherboard.
Years ago, I used striped RAID to improve performance.

>64
Some days the dragon wins. Suck it up.

charlieg10-May-23 2:56

charlieg

10-May-23 2:56

That's the thing with the RAID I had - we had lost a few drives in the field, and replacement was what you would expect. But when just *one* of the controller boards failed, and they were described as redundant, we were toast. I'm just glad it happened in the lab and not a customer's system.

Charlie Gilley

“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759

Has never been more appropriate.

theoldfool10-May-23 3:34

theoldfool

10-May-23 3:34

Yes, that is the job of a DR backup. We have a "kit", off site.

>64
Some days the dragon wins. Suck it up.

jmaida9-May-23 12:30

jmaida

9-May-23 12:30

I avoid RAID systems.
These posts have confirmed my reasons.
Many moons ago, we set up one for University computer science class.
It did not last the semester.
It was abandoned as a storage system for students and became an exercise in computer hardware diagnostics.
When things go bad with them, they can really go bad.
Just saying.

"A little time, a little trouble, your better day"
Badfinger

Anyone have any experience with Sager laptops?

Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter9-May-23 17:53

Kornfeld Eliyahu Peter

9-May-23 17:53

I have RAIDs too. A lot of them. And hot swap works with no issue. I can swap out faulty drives without powering off even... But remember - you need not only the RAID, but the proper system too...

"If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization." ― Gerald Weinberg

honey the codewitch9-May-23 2:19

9-May-23 2:19

I've read some product reviews, and googled "Sager sucks" and the standard mess, but I don't trust random Internet reviews that much.

I hear the main drawback of them is the trackpad, the noise when gaming, and they are heavy.

Pro is ostensibly built like a tank and a lot of computer for the money.

I have some faith in the community here so I'm wondering if any of you have owned a Sager laptop in recent years and can offer your opinion.

Just for context, I plan on mostly using it as a second (linux) PC, but I also plan to use it when I visit my sister, for things like gaming with her.

To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.

glennPattonWork39-May-23 2:46

glennPattonWork3

9-May-23 2:46

I found the USB's a bit unreliable, constant 'Dunk, Dunk'...

Single Step Debugger9-May-23 6:28

Single Step Debugger

9-May-23 6:28

honey the codewitch wrote:
I hear the main drawback of them is the trackpad, the noise when gaming, and they are heavy.

For this kind of money have you considered XPS-17? It's using the fans only on really heavy loads and it's relatively quiet. Also, XPS is very stylish and can be used as a workhorse. You cannot show up in an office with a bulky gaming laptop and sill look professional.

The only downside is that the XPS is with RTX 4070 and Sager with 4080 because the latter has 12MB memory that can make a difference for some unoptimized games.

Edit: Scratch that, just checked and the last gen XPS can be configured with 4080.

Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

honey the codewitch9-May-23 6:32

9-May-23 6:32

It's got an i7 which has the worst performance per watt of any of the high end 13gen intels. I've been trying to avoid it. I might be able to work with a 4070 since I only play Fallout 4 (a lot), and GTA V (very occasionally) but, I want this system to last a number of years. I don't intend to travel a lot with it, and I don't care about looks. I do like that it has an i9 and a 4080. My desktop has the i5k of that gen which matches it in single core perf. It would be nice to know I can run any of my stuff with relatively similar specs on both machines.

To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.

Single Step Debugger9-May-23 6:46

Single Step Debugger

9-May-23 6:46

I edited my post - you can have i9 and 4080 but it doesn't matter. If you don't travel a dedicated gaming laptop like Sager(or Alienware) will have a better cooling. And you probably already know this, but when compared to a desktop the "mobile" RTX 4080 will barely match the performance of a desktop RTX 3080 (which is still impressive).

Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

honey the codewitch9-May-23 6:50

9-May-23 6:50

Forgive me, I knew there would be a performance loss for mobile, but a whole generation? I'm suspicious Suspicious | :suss:

especially considering what a leap the new architecture is compared to the old. I'm not sure about the 4070 and lower but the architecture on the 4080 and 4090 is just stellar. The 4080 in particular is 325 watts or so while the 3080 is 300 so I find it a little hard to believe they'd have comparable performance given the architecture differences at roughly the same power. I expect a much better performance per watt from the 4 series, if they are *anything* like the desktop cards - by which I mean the same GPU architecture.

Edit: Even if you're right, I won't be playing at 4k on mobile so the mobile 4080 should be fine. Smile | :)

To err is human. Fortune favors the monsters.

Single Step Debugger9-May-23 7:04

Single Step Debugger

9-May-23 7:04

Your limiting factor is the power and the memory, not the architecture. In a laptop you are getting the same performance as the previous generation but using half of the power. Which as I said is impressive. For the particular numbers check some reviews and benchmarks on youtube - you will get a better idea what to expect. And yes - laptop's 4080 will be fine for a verry long time.

Advertise here – minimum three posts per day are guaranteed.

honey the codewitch9-May-23 7:49