Quote:
Originally Posted by hubcapsc
I'm used to being able to raid disks of differing sizes together
resulting in an array that corresponds to the smallest disk. I
guess some individual vendor's hardware might have different
limitations.
I've read a bunch of posts to this thread, probably not all of them. Are
y'all wanting raid for redundancy or performance? If it is for performance,
what causes that requirement? Are your tools blowing out data so fast
that you're ending up with corrupted files or ?
-Mike
|
Mike being new to RAID I'm not quite understanding when you say "corresponds to the smallest disk " do you is limited to the smallest disk size ?
I thought the reason for RAID was to have Aggregate of all the drives ?
And no, not performance and not data corruption, the reason is for file storage , specifically Final Cut Pro X video files. My iMac works fine performance wise for my audio recording mixing and video recording and editing ...
But even though it is 2 TB iMac it was close to running out of storage, before I purged the FCPX folder. And most of my recordings are now for music audio/video productions