| Re: R.A.I.D. Questions? Should I split it or keep it as one? [message #390482 is a reply to message #390226] |
Sat, 13 June 2009 08:21   |
 |
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma:
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Speedy059 wrote on Fri, 12 June 2009 02:45 |
Just stick with Raid 1 if you have two hard drives. It's pointless to do Raid 0 for your personal computer. You wont know the difference from Raid 1 and Raid 0 if it's your personal computer. Raid 0/10 is only beneficial for webservers and database servers when you have 1000's of queries going on.
People who use Raid 0 on their personal computer are doing it to satisfy their psychological mindset that they will see a big speed increase on Raid 0.
|
RAID 1 is THE MOST OVERRATED RAID LEVEL. Simply because it *looks* like a form of backup, while it actually is not. As assoon a virus removes/damages your file, it will do so on both disks. RAID 1 only protects you from 1 disk dying. Which from my experiance doesnt happen often, and if it is dying, SMART will usually give an error.
The advantage of RAID 0 is that you'll get increased sustained read/writes, and a possible average lower seektime (with multiple IO).
Idealy you would run RAID 5 or RAID 6. RAID 5 can be done with just 3 disks, and will give you a 1/3 loss of total diskspace, but 1 disk can drop out of the array without problems.
RAID 6 would give you the speed benefits of RAID 0, but with the same level of redundancy as RAID 1. Minimum amount of disks is 4. You'll lose 50% of the total diskspace, but you can also lose 2 disks without losing data.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
