Is there redundancy having hard drives formatted as Extended (Journaled) AND using a RAID 1 hard drive set-up? Can I just use RAID 0 and the Extended (Journaled) does the rest?
Logic Pro, Mac OS X (10.7.2), Kurzweil PC3
Kipsie wrote:
Can I just use RAID 0 and the Extended (Journaled) does the rest?
Not sure what your objective is.
OS X Extended (Journaled) is the volume's format.
A RAID 0 objective is speed while a RAID i objective is redundancy.
So – assuming you have multiple volumes – by choosing RAID 0 and OS X Extended (Journaled), you would wind up with a fast, but not mirrored RAID.
Here's a support doc, which goes into more detail.
I want to avoid redundancy. If the purpose of Extended (Journaled) is for protecting against lost data and RAID 1 is for protection of lost data, I wonder if they are both doing the same thing? Since I have to format the hard drives as Extended (Journaled), why would I opt for RAID 1 instead the faster RAID 0? I film 4k, and any speed I can squeeze out, I will! 😉
Journalling is to protect you from losing data that is only partial written from the computer to the disk drive when there is a computer failure.
RAID 1 is to protect you from the lose of disk drive.
So they are not redundant, Having said that the only place the RAID 1 is justified is mission critical servers.
Thanks to all of you! I got a clearer picture!
RAID 0 versus RAID 1 with Extended (Journaled)
