RAID-F vs tRAID
| Feature | RAID-F | tRAID |
|---|---|---|
| Snapshot RAID | Yes | No |
| Real-Time RAID | Yes, but experimental | Yes |
| Live data reconstruction in the case of a drive failure? | No. The failed drive must be recovered. | Yes |
| Various RAID engines and Multi-Parity support | Yes | Yes |
| Are surviving drives fully readable/writable even in the event of failure past the tolerance level? | Yes | Yes |
| Supports drives with existing data on them? | Yes | Yes |
| Can a drive be pulled from the RAID and read in another system standalone? | Yes | Yes |
| Supports any file system | Yes | Yes |
| OS support? | Windows and Linux | Windows and Linux |
| Datarot detection | Yes | No |
| Can RAID include specific folders, specific data set, media drives, and ad-hoc content? | Yes | No |
| Ability to exclude certain content from the RAID? | Yes | No |
| Recovery of specific files | Yes | No, only recover a whole drive. Has no concept of files. |
| Supports network mapped drives as part of the RAID? | Yes | No |
| Can upgrade from a small drive to a bigger drive by just copying the data over and without affecting parity? | Yes | No |
| Vulnerable to the Snapshot RAID sync hole? | - Yes if Snapshot RAID (see Understanding the limitations of Snapshot RAID) - No, if Real-Time RAID | No |
Summary
As you can see, tRAID is not a replacement for RAID-F.
RAID-F makes some pretty compelling arguments.
Where tRAID wins over RAID-F is in that its real-time RAID feature is far more robust.
As stated above, please also read the detailed text comparison of Transparent RAID vs. RAID over File System.
The post Table comparison of Transparent RAID vs RAID over File System appeared first on FlexRAID.
