I realize that if you have two individual drives and only one mechanically fails, you still have the other one intact. While if you have a RAID 0 setup, if one drive breaks, you lose data on both drives because files span across drives.

What I'm not sure about is, is RAID's reading and writing process inherently more unreliable than writing to a single drive?

I'm not talking about mechanical failure, rather the possibility of additional read/write errors being introduced by using RAID.

Peter /


Using Raid O in my studios for the past 8 years. Initally fitted the Promise
Technologhy Raid Controller on al my edit suites. Had Zero data loss for
the given period.

Lately using on board motherboard raid controller / So far - So Good.


Mabye Just Lucky .

My feedback under extreme conditions - Africa - Heat and constant power - electricity failures.

I realize that if you have two individual drives and only one mechanically fails, you still have the other one intact. While if you have a RAID 0 setup, if one drive breaks, you lose data on both drives because files span across drives.

What I'm not sure about is, is RAID's reading and writing process inherently more unreliable than writing to a single drive?

I'm not talking about mechanical failure, rather the possibility of additional read/write errors being introduced by using RAID.

In general, but especially when it comes to editing systems, Raid 0 should be avoided because, as you suggested, Peter, if one hard disk fails, your project is corrupted and, in most cases, unlikely to be restored. Raid 5 is the best choice, because all you have to do is replace the bad disk and continue to work.