Comment

Yes, as the other people pointed out, that's what I mean. The standard Linux software RAID (also called MD RAID)

It's proven, battle-tested, pretty robust and you don't rely on any specific vendor formats or any hardware for that matter. The main point would be to keep it simple. You could use BTRFS or ZFS or all kinds of things. But it only introduces additional complexity and points of failure. And has no benefits over a plain mirror (what the RAID1 does) if we're talking about just 2 devices. At least it served me well in the past. Contrary to cheap hardware RAID controllers and also BTRFS which also let me down once. But a lot of development went in to that since then and the situation might have changed. But mdraid is reliable anyways.

source

Sort:hotnew top

Findmysec@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
How about bitrot?

source
- hendrik@palaver.p3x.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
  That is indeed a good question. Is this something RAID is bothered with at levels 0 and 1? I think in this case it's the job of the filesystem to care for that. But you should probably let the periodic task run that does scrubbing like once per week. You could also experience other issues than just bitrot. For example bad sectors and one of the hdds slowly degrading.
  
  In the end I don't think a RAID1 can do much about bitrot and other RAID woes. There are no checksums or anything to correct for that. You'd probably need some other technology for that.
  
  source
  - Findmysec@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago
    I think ZFS does some advanced stuff which makes it better than just relying on hardware checksums (which have been shown to not be so great)
    
    source