RAID is an acronym for Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks. It is a fault tolerance mechanism for Windows NT servers, which does not require any additional software (Tomsho, 2016). RAID setups are a major cause of customer aggravation, as indicated by the fact that they account for a sizable number of complaints. After weighing the challenges and advantages of RAID, it is not advisable to use them unless in the most extreme instances.
The fundamental issue with RAID is that users considerably complicate their systems by utilizing them. They not only depend on two hard drives to function properly but also on a substantially more sophisticated interface (the RAID controller). If any of those entries fails, the array will malfunction. If even one hard disk fails for a short period, users are left with a degraded array. During this time, the RAID controller is tasked with providing error correction and array management (Liu & Xing, 2021). Unfortunately, all RAID controllers built into a motherboard are of poor quality. They were introduced as an afterthought to the motherboard, a feature added solely because the manufacturer understands that adding any function increases the likelihood of selling their products. At a time when practically every current motherboard includes built-in RAID, they have it to be regarded on par with their competition in terms of feature set.
Surprisingly, it is not that straightforward regarding the extent of RAID failures. Because RAID challenges are not black-and-white failure issues, hard data is difficult to get. However, many support personnel concur that between 25% and 30% of clients will contact organizations during the first year to report a deteriorated RAID array or other problem directly related to their arrangement (Liu & Xing, 2021). A faulty RAID1 array does not necessarily result in data loss but is a lengthy, tedious nuisance. On the contrary, a single hard drive frequently exhibits warning indicators prior to failure; therefore, this situation does not always imply data loss.
It is well acknowledged that RAID0 entails a significant risk of data loss. When appropriate, consumers frequently demand RAID0 for its performance advantages. What is not recognized is that the speed improvements are context-dependent. Disk performance is determined by two primary factors: access time and throughput. The access time of a hard drive determines how rapidly it can do one operation after another, whereas the throughput establishes how quickly information can be accessed or written. While RAID0 improves throughput, it does not affect access time (Tomsho, 2016). This indicates that the performance gain will be minor if one reads and writes a huge number of tiny files. Users will see an advantage if they read or write a significant volume of data to a single area on the disk. Thus, when moving or copying massive data, RAID0 may make sense.
RAID configurations are a significant source of customer dissatisfaction, as seen by the high volume of complaints. The critical challenge with RAID is that they significantly complicate users’ systems. They are not just reliant on two hard drives but also the RAID controller, a substantially more advanced functionality. If any of those entries is faulty, the array will fail. It is well accepted that RAID0 carries a substantial risk of data loss. After assessing the risks and benefits of RAID, it is not recommended to incorporate it except in extreme circumstances.
References
Liu, Q., & Xing, L. (2021). Survivability and vulnerability analysis of cloud RAID systems under disk faults and attacks. International Journal of Mathematical, Engineering and Management Sciences, 6(1), 15-29. Web.
Tomsho, G. (2016). Guide to networking essentials (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.