Microsoft iSCSI Software Initiator

I wouldn't call it a good conversation--more like trolling on what I was advising on, lol.

So the idea behind 0+1 is that you can have more than 2 drives fail and still have no data loss, where you can't do this 5 or 6. The only reason to add 0 on top of 1 is for performance which would be like 0, but the safety of 1 since each stripe is also mirrored. You could lose 2x drives in a single mirror and it would kill the stripe and the raid. But only 6 is able to survive 2x failure scenario. However losing both drives in a mirror is rare, and more than likely you would lose a drive in a mirrored pair. With the number of drives like you have, you can set up a stripe of 4 pairs and can actually lose 4 drives as long as they are part of a mirrored pair. This is far greater than any other raid level, and also the highest performance besides pure 0. Plus, a rebuild WON'T kill the raid as it's only one other drive that's being stressed, and even not really since drive to drive raid1 copies are easy. And the only reason I recommended it is because you don't need the space, and want longevity--a raid0+1 should survive more drive failures than raid6 due to less rebuilds.

Pretty cool raid0 of the Seagate hybrids. I always wondered how well that would work.

So performance is the same as a local usb 3 flash drive? That could be pretty good depending on the flash drive.

Lol! That's a lot of different drives that you've had failure experiences with!

Some of the older drives, especially when put in enterprise or 'critical use' scenarios, really did shine far past their original use.

Strange that there's corruption like that. Have you tried changing the sata cable? I know I've seen issues solved with cable changes.

Synology and most other NAS units are software raid. And this is a good thing for the points that you noted as well as the fact that if the unit itself physically fails while the drives are good, you can usually migrate the drives to a computer and boot up a linux live cd and access the data again without an issue.

10 isn't at all like 5 because of the increased resistance to total failure, faster rebuild times, and superior performance--all at the cost of more storage. 10 actually hurts too much when you have just a few drives. It's when you have a large number of drives that it makes more sense--like your setup.

I think a 10 setup would last longer than a 6 setup, but time will tell on that one. 64TB volume rebuilds are going to be brutal on the drives and the more times you have to do this, the more likely another drive is to fail. However, you've got good drives with the exos so maybe you'll be okay for 6-7 years--after that I would expect the raid to fail completely.

 

No one was shouting or calling you an idiot. However, I still think you don't really know as much about using RAID as you claim you do.

LSI is pretty much the defacto standard now. Even the oems like Dell and HP are actually LSI based cards. LSI's history goes back to the same era as Adaptec, so they've been around since nearly the beginning of SCSI.

There are very few tower NAS units that use hardware raid. Most hardware raid based NAS units are also rack mounted units. The way you usually know if they're hardware is that they'll support SAS and SATA drives. Hardware raid is too expensive for today's common NAS units, but linux software raid is quite robust and has become a bit of a standard on its own.

 

So, this is a thread about iSCSI initiator for XP and it has been fulfilled.

Thanks, @Madeleine Takam!