Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Windows 64bit > Plans for RAID

Reply
Thread Tools

Plans for RAID

 
 
Randy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-02-2006
Well, I'm taking the plunge and setting up a second SATA 80G Maxtor on my
Dell SC1420. Any advice as to whether I should go with RAID 0 or 1 (or
JBOD)? I guess I could grab a third drive and go with RAID 0+1 if enough
folks feel that's the best.

It's going to be a start-from-scratch setup, dual-booting x32 and x64 XP
Pro, and maybe also x32 and x64 Server 2003, although I don't really see
a use for that from my perspective, except to continue playing with them
for the benefit of this and similar groups..

And I'll be setting the RAID up via BIOS and Windows itself, not an add-in
card. I guess that might mean I'm forced to install Server 2003??? Time to
get out my manual I guess.

My objective is to provide redundancy (safety) more so than speed
enhancements, as it seems plenty fast enough as it is with a single SATA
hard drive (and that with nothing more than a single 2.8GHz Xeon, although I
also plan to add a second soon) and 512MB DDR2 PC400 RAM (ECC Reg.,
which I also plan to boost to 1G soon).

Note that I don't feel a *need* to make either upgrade OR setup a RAID
configuration or even add a second drive; it's purely a desire to explore
and see what's possible. I don't even use this server much... I see it as
a learning tool and "funhouse" (again, showing my geekdom, guilty as
charged).

Alternatively, I could take the funds earmarked for all three of the above
upgrades and instead buy an Athlon X2 64 4400/2M for yet another learning
experience (yeah, it's grand not being married again) *IF* enough here think
it's that much a superior system, and will be as easy to setup (to date,
zero problems and very little time required to install either x64 OS).

TIA.




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-02-2006
First, do some reading so you understand what RAID is and what the different
numbers mean. RAID 0 is not RAID at all - it is striping and will actually
INCREASE your exposure to failure. RAID-1 is mirroring and fully redundant.
Not much speedup, except for some improvement from parallel reads, but you
can blow a drive out and still run fine.

RAID 0+1 requires 4 drives, not 3.


--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

Randy wrote:
> Well, I'm taking the plunge and setting up a second SATA 80G Maxtor on my
> Dell SC1420. Any advice as to whether I should go with RAID 0 or 1 (or
> JBOD)? I guess I could grab a third drive and go with RAID 0+1 if enough
> folks feel that's the best.
>
> It's going to be a start-from-scratch setup, dual-booting x32 and x64 XP
> Pro, and maybe also x32 and x64 Server 2003, although I don't really see
> a use for that from my perspective, except to continue playing with them
> for the benefit of this and similar groups..
>
> And I'll be setting the RAID up via BIOS and Windows itself, not an add-in
> card. I guess that might mean I'm forced to install Server 2003??? Time to
> get out my manual I guess.
>
> My objective is to provide redundancy (safety) more so than speed
> enhancements, as it seems plenty fast enough as it is with a single SATA
> hard drive (and that with nothing more than a single 2.8GHz Xeon,
> although I also plan to add a second soon) and 512MB DDR2 PC400 RAM (ECC
> Reg.,
> which I also plan to boost to 1G soon).
>
> Note that I don't feel a *need* to make either upgrade OR setup a RAID
> configuration or even add a second drive; it's purely a desire to explore
> and see what's possible. I don't even use this server much... I see it as
> a learning tool and "funhouse" (again, showing my geekdom, guilty as
> charged).
>
> Alternatively, I could take the funds earmarked for all three of the above
> upgrades and instead buy an Athlon X2 64 4400/2M for yet another learning
> experience (yeah, it's grand not being married again) *IF* enough here
> think it's that much a superior system, and will be as easy to setup (to
> date, zero problems and very little time required to install either x64
> OS).
>
> TIA.



 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Rob Stow
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-02-2006
Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:
>
> RAID 0+1 requires 4 drives, not 3.
>



RAID 0+1 and 1+0 both require 2n drives, with n at least 2.


As far as 3 drives goes ... there is nothing stopping someone
from having a 2 drive stripe set and mirroring it onto a single
drive - and I have personally done it just to prove the point to
a skeptic. It would raise a lot of hackles to call it 0+1, but
it does work.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Charlie Russel - MVP
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-02-2006
OK, yes, you could do that. And no, I probably would not call it 0+1.

(and you're correct about the 2n, I was simplifying.)


--
Charlie.
http://msmvps.com/xperts64

Rob Stow wrote:
> Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:
>>
>> RAID 0+1 requires 4 drives, not 3.
>>

>
>
> RAID 0+1 and 1+0 both require 2n drives, with n at least 2.
>
>
> As far as 3 drives goes ... there is nothing stopping someone
> from having a 2 drive stripe set and mirroring it onto a single
> drive - and I have personally done it just to prove the point to
> a skeptic. It would raise a lot of hackles to call it 0+1, but
> it does work.



 
Reply With Quote
 
Randy
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      01-03-2006
Yeah...

I looked at my manuals again, and the onboard (Adaptec) controller won't do
"0+1", and I'm not big on just mirroring a drive full-time (due to
performance hits, space required, and wear-and-tear), nor having to buy a 2x
bigger drive to backup should I go with the performance-enhancing striped
RAID (or with which to mirror it in a pseudo "0+1" RAID).

Ideally, I'd like to go with striping with parity, but that's not happening
without a new hard drive controller. My system *does* support the use of a
"hot blank" drive, which apparently saves at least a little work of
repairing a broken RAID, but is nowhere near as complete as using parity.
And once you have four hard drives in the box, you have to add another
case/CPU fan/shroud and memory cooling shroud... all Dell proprietary (read:
expensive) crap.

So I'm thinking I'll wait for now, but consider striping and simply backing
it up to an external drive every night or week as a cloned, bootable copy...
and then if the RAID dies, I'd use that 2x sized drive to create a new 4x
sized RAID (0). That was the plan all along; 2x40G cloned to an 80G, which
then becomes 2x80G cloned to a 160G, which then becomes 2x160G cloned to a
320G (at which point the entire paradigm will likely have shifted anyway --
my need for more space, or the way we store data). And I'd migrate each time
regardless of the health of the existing RAID, simply based on space
requirements... I could even be using cheaper PATA drives as clones, whether
I keep them as the new RAID drives or simply clone them back to fresh new
SATA drives when the time comes. Or to whatever storage medium then
exists, with merely a tweak of the boot.ini file to reflect it. Hopefully...

Of course all this thinking started back with two Compaq dualie servers (P3
Xeons) and SCSI drives (9G to 18G to 36G to 72G etc.), but then Dell
grabbed my attention away with a $500 dual P4 Xeon server (never to be
sold at that price point again) and SATA drives... my SCSIs gather dust now.
Why two servers? To mirror one to the other for ultimate redundancy... ;~)

The manual states the RAID control (via BIOS settings) is "OS independent",
yet specifies "OS Compatibility" of Win 2000 (?) and Win Server 2003, but I
think those are simply what Dell supports on the system itself. I guess I
could just throw Win2k Pro on there if that's all it takes... sweet OS.

Thanks to you and Charlie for your input. I missed the sale on the drives
anyway... ;~) When they were going for under $50, it suddenly seemed like a
fun (and *inexpensive*) idea to play with. But thinking it through, it seems
it might be more of a disadvantage at this point, considering my limited
needs.

"Rob Stow" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:%(E-Mail Removed)...
> Charlie Russel - MVP wrote:
> >
> > RAID 0+1 requires 4 drives, not 3.
> >

>
>
> RAID 0+1 and 1+0 both require 2n drives, with n at least 2.
>
>
> As far as 3 drives goes ... there is nothing stopping someone
> from having a 2 drive stripe set and mirroring it onto a single
> drive - and I have personally done it just to prove the point to
> a skeptic. It would raise a lot of hackles to call it 0+1, but
> it does work.




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Test plans and "refined test plans" DZantow Python 0 12-20-2011 06:24 PM
F6 for SCSI or RAID ? (i.e. it's not to do with SATA or IDE ?) + installing windows on a RAID boot device jameshanley39@yahoo.co.uk Computer Information 0 01-31-2007 07:45 PM
SATA - Raid and Non Raid Question BigAl.NZ@gmail.com Computer Support 1 01-11-2007 12:16 AM
Does x64 require a SATA RAID Driver to install non-RAID SATA Drive =?Utf-8?B?VGhlb3JldGljYWxseQ==?= Windows 64bit 6 07-18-2005 05:45 AM
Converting RAID 0 array to RAID 0+1 - Advice sought. Mod Computer Support 0 11-26-2003 08:11 PM



Advertisments