Quote:
|
Originally Posted by radio
It took about 2 days to rebuild, but that's an unfair assesment because I was copying 300GB to is at the same time. I may break it again and test the rebuilding, but not until after I copy another 250GB. Then again, I might not bother. This is a production machine, and not really a playground.
oidar
|
But even then, 2 days? Holy crap!
I understand your point
"production machine, and not really a playground", but think on this a second. As a production machine, does this not lend even more importance to verifying that it will do what it is supposed to do after a failure, especialy in the light that there is doubts about it? Do you want to find out after something fails and there may be important data on the unit? Just a thought.
For the record, there is some serios doubt from blue68f100 and myself that the 300 or 320 GB drives work properly in a 4000 in RAID 5. They may format, they may build the array, but there is some serious speculation that the 4000 has some OS limit for the array and may not be capable of properly restoring the array. Part of that serious doubt is coming from the amount of time to build or rebuild the arrays. A 20% to 25% increase in HD size with a 300% to 500% increase in build or rebuild time does not add up. That is part of what we are trying to determine here.