| R.A.I.D. Questions? Should I split it or keep it as one? [message #389999] |
Wed, 10 June 2009 14:41  |
 |
DarkKnight
Messages: 754
Registered: May 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
I need to reinstall windows xp pro on my pc but I have a Raid setup. I'm researching if it's better for me to keep the Raid or split the drives. At work I've asked a few in our tech department and I get mixed answers.
I know theirs a lot here who have strong technical knowledge and would like to know your opinion.
The hard drives are 270 Gbs. Which setup would be faster? Which better to do? Please state why with your answer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: R.A.I.D. Questions? Should I split it or keep it as one? [message #390034 is a reply to message #389999] |
Wed, 10 June 2009 18:19  |
 |
nikki6ixx
Messages: 2545
Registered: August 2007
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
I'm of the mind that using a RAID 0 setup with just two drives is too much of a gamble, given that when it comes to performance, unless you're hardcore, the benefits aren't really that high.
Sure loading programs a bit faster is nice, but if one drive goes to hell, any 'time savings' from RAID 0 will be wiped out by one or two days' hassle of trying to recover data, and get everything back into working condition.
Renegade:
| Aircraftkiller wrote on Fri, 10 January 2014 16:56 |
The only game where everyone competes to be an e-janitor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: R.A.I.D. Questions? Should I split it or keep it as one? [message #390226 is a reply to message #389999] |
Thu, 11 June 2009 17:45 |
Speedy059
Messages: 367
Registered: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
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.
Oldest Renegade Repository (10yrs worth of maps!)
http://renegade.dmehosting.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 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: 0
|
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.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: R.A.I.D. Questions? Should I split it or keep it as one? [message #390757 is a reply to message #390482] |
Tue, 16 June 2009 01:42 |
Speedy059
Messages: 367
Registered: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
| EvilWhiteDragon wrote on Sat, 13 June 2009 11:21 |
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.
|
Yes that is correct, Raid 1 will not protect against viruses or anything else that is similar to it. It only protects from hard drive failure.
I'm unsure that Raid 0 will increase your seek time since the hard drives are still going the same speed. But it can transfer files quicker....
Idealy you are wasting your time and resources going for Raid 5+ when for a personal computer. Any important information should be backed up remotely, not locally. I honestly haven't had much lucky with raid systems as it's always something else that ruins your data like what you mentioned earlier.
Oldest Renegade Repository (10yrs worth of maps!)
http://renegade.dmehosting.com/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: R.A.I.D. Questions? Should I split it or keep it as one? [message #390864 is a reply to message #389999] |
Tue, 16 June 2009 15:07 |
Speedy059
Messages: 367
Registered: August 2003
Karma: 0
|
Commander |
|
|
The reason I like Raid 1 isn't just for the redundant disks, but with the higher end Raid cards it will grab files from both hard drives at the same time. As oppose to Raid 0 the data is stripped across the hard drives and can only 1 file at a time. Raid 1 can multi-task and read off of both hard drives for different files. Writting will be slower, but reading will be slightly faster.
I guess I'm just biased and don't like Raid 0 unless it's associated with Raid 1 in a Raid 10 setup. Seen to many issues with Raid 0 with web servers and database servers that I manage.
Oldest Renegade Repository (10yrs worth of maps!)
http://renegade.dmehosting.com/
[Updated on: Tue, 16 June 2009 15:08] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
)
