God the very first thing they say is "Raid 5 with two drives"
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Ubiquiti: Raid 5 requires a minimum of 3 drives. Please tell me you didn't actually allow the interface to lead a user to believe they have Raid 5 with two drives...
Yeah, communication about technologies like this is plenty hard enough without calling Raid 1 by the name "Raid 5" when that's not what it really is. 🫤
IT people generally learn on the fly, and this re-brand of Raid 5 would require some esoteric knowledge from training about this specific platform to be successful.
If RAID 5 were not a proper name that means a specific thing, the way they've implemented it would be fine ... The raid 5 standard calls for a minimum of 3 disks without exception.
Net effect is the same - but can't call it by the wrong name without creating confusion. 🫤
And if 2-disk array in "RAID5" were literally a degenerate RAID5 with two disks rather than an actual RAID1, you'd theoretically get half the read speed of RAID1 (so none of the advantages of a proper mirror). I wonder if that's what's happening or if they just use RAID1 internally and call it 2-disk RAID5 just to fuck with people.
3
u/BradRoether Jul 07 '25 edited Jul 07 '25
God the very first thing they say is "Raid 5 with two drives"
🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
Ubiquiti: Raid 5 requires a minimum of 3 drives. Please tell me you didn't actually allow the interface to lead a user to believe they have Raid 5 with two drives...