RAID question

Hi All People,
I am going to setup a Linux Server running on RAID 1
My questions are, in case of crash/bad sector of the hard drive, :
1) Can I change the mirroring drive to be the hard drive and replace a new hard disc as mirroring drive allowing the server to continue running without reinstallation?
2) If ˉYESˇ. Is there different procedure in installation and setup of the Server? Or just the same procedure ?
3) IF ˉNO'. Is there any solution to keep the server continue running without lost of data and reinstallation?
4) Can RAID 0, stripping, increases the speed of the Server or only the speed in saving and retrieving files?
Thanks in advance.
Stephen Liu

1. RE: RAID question
Zeno Aug-09-02 10:10 AM
In response to message 0

There're at least a dozen different commercial versions of Linux server and some of them have different RAID specs based on recent revisions of the Linux kernel. I, for one, have no idea which one you're talking about. So there's no intelligent way to answer your question with the information posted. Please repost with at least name and version number.
If I were you, I'd think about getting a hardware-based RAID controller with a driver that's compatible with whatever version of the Linux server/kernel you're trying to install. Then read the installation instructions *very* carefully.
RAID won't speed up your hardware, but it might increase your total system throughput.
Best wishes...

2. RE: RAID question
satimis Aug-09-02 07:43 PM
In response to message 1

Thanks for your response.
I am running RH7.3 with hardware RAIL which support 0, 1 and 0+1 and going to build MySQL on it.
I am interested to learn in case of bad disk on stripping whether I can replace mirror disk on it without shutting down the server for a long time to resintall the OS.
RAID 5 can do this job but what about RAID 0+1.
Thanks in advance.
Stephen Liu

3. RE: RAID question
Zeno Aug-10-02 01:38 PM
In response to message 2

If you're planning to run SQL on a public domain, I wouldn't consider anything less than RAID 5. This will require at least 3 HD's in your array. RH7.X should support this with no problem IF you conform to the RH Hardware Compatibility List. I would check the HCL on their web site, and get a good RAID hardware RAID controller. RAID 0 is not fault tolerant, and RAID 1 is a waste of storage space.
Best wishes...

4. RE: RAID question
Zeno Aug-10-02 03:06 PM
In response to message 3

LAST EDITED ON Aug-10-02 AT 03:07 PM (EDT)

Maybe I should clarify my last post, because I didn't speak directly to your point, for which I appologize.
RAID 0+1 is going to require a minimum of four HDs -- one pair for striping and one pair for mirroring. If you have a database of limited size, say 100 GB, you might be able to get by with only 3 large HDs using RAID 5. It depends on the size of your database. IMHO RAID 5 is the best way to go.
My problem is that I'm not used to thinking on the scale of enterprise networks. I usually deal small networks with less than 25 PCs and 1 or 2 routers.
RH has probably the best tech support there is, so you might be better off off to ask them for advice. And there are many forums in Tech Republic that specialize in Linux support. Anyone else have an opinion?

5. RE: RAID question
satimis Aug-11-02 04:31 AM
In response to message 4

Hi
Noted with thanks
Stephen