RAID 1

[RollWave]

Right now I run a RAID 0 system and I got a trojan that really f*d up my system and I'm pretty sure I'm going to have to reformat. if I was runnign RAID 1 would this really help me or would the trojan just infect both drives? RAID 1 only protects from HD failure RIGHT?

Thanks in advance,
Raj

 

[Crusty]

Correct

 

[orion7144]

You are correct.

 

[Crusty]

Correct

 

[DaveSimmons]

Exactly. That's why I use a DVD burner instead, and external HDs for my music jukebox.

External drives are safe _if_ you never attach them to an infected machine.

RAID-1 is most useful for real time backup (for example on a file or database server) and to provide minimal protection for people too lazy to do real backups.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Sounds like it might be time to look at different anti-virus solutions.

 

[LED]

This is why I do not run RAID1 along with wanting a performance increase with RAID 0 I found that by copying my Data to a seperate HD and also backing/copying my RAID 0 setup to another HD it's more secure. There is no antivirus program that can protect a HD from receiving a newly created Virus that it doesn't know about.

 

[RollWave]

well I used panda. It caught it right when I booted up after the big time crash. I think i turned it off at the really wrong time before panda got to it.

 

[zodder]

RAID-1 is most useful for real time backup (for example on a file or database server) and to provide minimal protection for people too lazy to do real backups.

Ahh, NO. It provides redundency for mission critical machines.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: zodder

RAID-1 is most useful for real time backup (for example on a file or database server) and to provide minimal protection for people too lazy to do real backups.

Ahh, NO. It provides redundency for mission critical machines.

real time backup == redundancy.

Any real business uses the RAID1 to keep the drives constantly in synch (call it "redundancy" or "real time backup," same meaning here) then has offline and preferably off-site backup for safety against fire, flood, theft, employee stupidity, etc.

 

[RollWave]

i hate trojans!

 

[Kenazo]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: zodder

RAID-1 is most useful for real time backup (for example on a file or database server) and to provide minimal protection for people too lazy to do real backups.

Ahh, NO. It provides redundency for mission critical machines.

real time backup == redundancy.

Any real business uses the RAID1 to keep the drives constantly in synch (call it "redundancy" or "real time backup," same meaning here) then has offline and preferably off-site backup for safety against fire, flood, theft, employee stupidity, etc.

wouldn't most "real" businesses use a Raid 5 setup?

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Any real business uses the RAID1 to keep the drives constantly in synch (call it "redundancy" or "real time backup," same meaning here) then has offline and preferably off-site backup for safety against fire, flood, theft, employee stupidity, etc.

wouldn't most "real" businesses use a Raid 5 setup?

Depends on the amount of data they have -- would you really buy a controller and 3+ drives to mirror 20 GB of data, instead of just 2 drives and the RAID1 built into most motherboards?

Remember as you add drives, the chance of drive failure increases, so a 4 drive RAID5 array is almost twice as likely to lose a drive as a RAID1 pair of drives. You wouldn't lose data, but it doubles your chance of maintenance headaches.

 

[BDawg]

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: zodder

RAID-1 is most useful for real time backup (for example on a file or database server) and to provide minimal protection for people too lazy to do real backups.

Ahh, NO. It provides redundency for mission critical machines.

real time backup == redundancy.

Any real business uses the RAID1 to keep the drives constantly in synch (call it "redundancy" or "real time backup," same meaning here) then has offline and preferably off-site backup for safety against fire, flood, theft, employee stupidity, etc.

wouldn't most "real" businesses use a Raid 5 setup?

For most of my "business" machines, I have the system drive set up on a mirrored RAID, and a data drive set up on a RAID 5 + hot spare.

 

[zodder]

I agree with you. I was just pointing out that Raid 1 does not necessarily mean the admin is lazy. I run Raid 1 at my non-profit agency (cost and size are issues), but I backup to tape every night as well.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: zodder
I agree with you. I was just pointing out that Raid 1 does not necessarily mean the admin is lazy. I run Raid 1 at my non-profit agency (cost and size are issues), but I backup to tape every night as well.

Ahh, I see -- by lazy people I meant the ones who use RAID1 as their only backup strategy, without also using a tape drive, CD/DVD burner, or external hard drive.

 

[ragiepew]

Originally posted by: zodder

RAID-1 is most useful for real time backup (for example on a file or database server) and to provide minimal protection for people too lazy to do real backups.

Ahh, NO. It provides redundency for mission critical machines.

exactly... RAID1 is to provide redundancy due to hardware failures not software/virus infections.

 

[mikecel79]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: Kenazo

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Any real business uses the RAID1 to keep the drives constantly in synch (call it "redundancy" or "real time backup," same meaning here) then has offline and preferably off-site backup for safety against fire, flood, theft, employee stupidity, etc.

wouldn't most "real" businesses use a Raid 5 setup?

Depends on the amount of data they have -- would you really buy a controller and 3+ drives to mirror 20 GB of data, instead of just 2 drives and the RAID1 built into most motherboards?

Remember as you add drives, the chance of drive failure increases, so a 4 drive RAID5 array is almost twice as likely to lose a drive as a RAID1 pair of drives. You wouldn't lose data, but it doubles your chance of maintenance headaches.

Actually most companies now offer RAID controllers that do RAID 5+ or as HP/Compaq calls it ADG. This allows up to 2 drives in array to fail before you lose the array.