Originally Posted by djdcm0722
I have enjoyed using FlexRaid, but due to the fact it is going commercial and every few months I am forced to update I am looking in to other options.
Going commercial is the answer to the betas which expire. I think this is a case of not being able to have your cake and eat it too.
Originally Posted by drealit
It calculates parity in real time (unlike storage software like FlexRAID/SnapRAID which use a snapshot system)
FlexRAID has a real time mode as well. Although IMHO, real time is not necessarily better. If you aren't dealing with data that changes frequently (i.e. movie rips), there's no significant advantage to real time. With snapshot, you can either invoke an update after you change data or rip a new movie, or you can schedule updates to happen often, or you can just live with delayed protection until your nightly update (or however often you have it scheduled). I generally do the latter. If I rip something, and a drive dies between that time and midnight, and it just so happens that it's the drive that movie ended up on, it's not a big deal. I know what I've ripped in the past 24hrs, so it's not a big deal to figure out what I've lost and re-rip just that one thing. If I rip a lot of stuff, or delete/change a bunch of stuff, then I may choose to manually invoke an update (though I very rarely change that data). But snapshot has the advantage of being somewhat like a back-up. If you or something
inadvertently deletes/changes data, you can always restore the original as long as you catch it and do it before the next update. Sometimes immediate updates aren't always best.
Simultaneous failures could lead to data loss but the chances of more than 1 drive failing at once are fairly slim.
That's entirely dependent on how many drives you have. I have over 20, and I HAVE had two drives fail before getting the data from the first recovered. Once a drive fails, you have to simultaneously read essentially the entire contents off of every disk in the array (depending on the size of the failed drive). If you have a bunch of drives, and perhaps even some that are "sister" drives where you bought a couple of the same kind at the same time, your chances of another one failing during recovery are greater than you might think. Recovering data from large arrays comprised of large drives can be a very lengthy process, and can tax other drives that may also be on the verge of failure. The more drives you have, the greater your chances of multiple failures within a given time frame. I'm currently running two parity drives, and will probably expand to three before I add many more drives. At 21 data drives to two parity drives, I'm already beyond what most consider best practice for RAID fault tolerance
If more than one do fail, only the data on the drives that have failed are at risk.
Indeed, so maybe parity isn't even needed.
Some people get scared because Tom (the dev) tends to "seemingly" go inactive for periods of time during the year
Heh, sounds like FlexRAID.
Hopefully that will get better once it goes commercial. I've always been fairly patient with any issues, considering it's free. I'm apt to be less forgiving once I've paid for it.