Which of the following has a higher risk of failure:
1 SSD drive
2 hard drives in RAID 0
2 hard drives in raid, by a long shot. You're at the mercy of the hardware in 2 hard drives not failing, if one fails, you lose everything. Drives have advantages over SSD's still though when it comes to size. If you don't need that much space, an SSD would be a good option but you'll pay a premium. If you're dealing with large files and what not, hard drives are still the way to go.
If you're planning to use hard drives in raid, make sure you get some good drives that are known to play well together in raid.
Remember that SSDs have no moving parts. This is a major advancement, no head crashes, no motors to burn out. And most SSDs also have protection against bitrot built-in as well.
RAID0 with two HDD.
The fact that there is TWO physical drives VS one physical drive. That alone doubles the chance. Keep in mind that in theory, SSDs are (should) be more reliable.
Either route, make data backups. I've had an SSD go bad on me within a year purchase. Thankfully mushkin was awesome on the RMA part.
A note I'd like to make is that in the last year, SSDs have matured A LOT. I've got a RAID rig I set up around 9 months ago that hasn't even been rebooted in the time since it came up, and the drives show zero faults.
Running FreeBSD with ZFS and full bit rotation on an iSCSI host, handles a small video studio who needed fast (100Gb/s) file pushing. System is 4 256Mb SSDs (mounted) and 4 1Tb magnetic SATA2 (in hotswap bays), all wrapped together. Their video production rig is freaky, too, 48 (12x4) core Opteron, blisters your eyeballs when Vegas renders.
Copyright 2013 © Godem Online Inc. | Web and server solutions by NewTech Solutions.