Michael Bahr
jedi at charm.net
Wed Jul 21 12:42:29 CDT 2010
Well, I can see your point that only ripping DVD's takes 2 minutes each and you do not need them anymore. But for me I record OTA/cable HD shows and uncut movies and cut out the commercials and archive them. Now I have whole seasons worth of shows and movies. I save money buy not buying the Blu-Ray disks ($30-$60 for each season or movie). So yes it is important to me to have a backup as these are not reproducible. A seperate media server setup as raid 1 does fit my needs. Mike... > >How much is your time worth? > > This is a classic case of insufficient analysis... > > The cost is not the cost of the drive. It is the cost of the drive (twice > the drives), plus the > cost of the SATA ports (twice) plus the cost of the power supply (twice > the disk current - 12v), > plus the cost of electricity to run the disks (twice the electricity) plus > the cost of a case big > enough to handle enough drives (twice as large disk cage) plus... > > Of course all my "twices" are on a "per disk used" basis, not a total > system cost and I understand > the difference. > > Furthermore, my time isn't the cost of my time to rip 200 dvds, it is the > cost of my time to rip 200 > dvds divided by the probability of losing 2 disks at the same time. > > I ripped my drives as I wanted to watch them, so it was an incremental > cost accumulated over time. > The actual time is about 2 minutes per dvd. 200 dvds per drive is an > actual cost of 200 minutes to > fill a drive. Would I actually rerip all of the disks? No because many > of them are for my kids who > are now older and don't even watch those disks any more, not to mention > the disks I ripped that I > just don't care about. > > HOWEVER... In the two years that I have been using the system, I have > never lost one of these > drives. Thus my time to "do it over again" is zero (so far). I have been > working with raid > extensively for about 5 years, and in those 5 years I have lost single > drives but I have never lost > two drives at the same time. > > I am sure that there are numbers out there that discuss the probability of > two drive failures. In > fact IIRC from that paper by google, the probability of failure of any > given single drive over 5 > years was about 14%? The probability of two failures (my simple math) > would be .14 * .14 = .0196 or > ~ 2%. That is for two failures, NOT two SIMULTANEOUS failures. > > All of this matters if the cost is catastrophic. Facing a 2% chance that > I will have to re-rip 200 > dvds in any given 5 year period, I am unwilling to commit the extra money > to preventing this > possibility. > > This whole discussion does point out that an analysis of the actual > numbers might cause one to come > to a different conclusion. And who knows, you might decide "screw the > costs", it is worth it to me. > > It is not worth it to me. > > Look at Unraid. > > http://lime-technology.com/ > > I am not trying to sell anyone on unRaid, I am simply saying consider it > for a specific class of > redundancy needs. For this level of redundancy need, unRaid seems like a > good compromise. > > John W. Colby > www.ColbyConsulting.com > > > Michael Bahr wrote: >> John, for your media collections you really should go only Raid 1. Yeah >> if you lose the HD you can re-do everything but who has the time? >> Besides >> 2TB HD's are ~<$150 or so. How much is your time worth? >> >> Mike... >> >>> I am about to build an UnRaid for my massive video / music collection. >>> I >>> currently have no >>> protection on that so if I lose a disk I lose all of that on one disk. >>> With Unraid I >>> would have "raid 5 like" >>> storage so that in the event of single drive failure I can still >>> recover. >>> If I do lose it I just >>> re-rip. Not the end of the world but not something I want to do. >>> >>> John W. Colby >>> www.ColbyConsulting.com > > -- > AccessD mailing list > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com >