Home Media Server: RAID 6 Repair vs. RAID 0 Restore

[Deleted member 673]

We have a home media server with about 30TB of video - currently on a RAID 6 array (6x16TB). We run daily versioned HyperBackups via 10GbE, alternating between two other servers that are also RAID 6 arrays (8x 10TB). All drives are Seagate Exos. Additions and changes, day-to-day, are easily re-created for at least a week of activity.

I'm considering running the home media server (but not backup servers) RAID 0. My thought process is that if the media server volume is degraded (eg. drive failure) it would be easier and faster to build a new volume and restore from backup - vs. repairing a RAID 6 array. So the only advantage I can see to RAID 6 is that it would allow me to continue using the home media server until it is convenient to create a new volume and restore from backup. And that's not a big deal in our world.

As a side benefit, RAID 0 would restore faster than RAID 6 - also, going to RAID 0 would free up two bays (and two drives) for another project.

Is this a fair analysis of the tradeoffs, given our circumstances? I welcome opinions and advice...

Regards,
Ron

 

[Telos]

I use RAID0 for primary. SHR for backup for the reasons you state. OTOH, using RAID0 for primary means that the bitrot healing that btfrs offers is forgotten. Such is life. Media is very forging of bitrot.

 

[Deleted member 673]

Great point. Thanks. I've made a habit of rebuilding and restoring the main volume about once / year whether there's a compelling reason to do so, or not. An "old school" fire drill...

 

[Rusty]

this a fair analysis of the tradeoffs, given our circumstances?

It is