RAID 1, I look for info speed.

Discussion in 'Computer Information' started by Adriano, Nov 15, 2003.

  1. Adriano

    Adriano Guest

    Hi,
    I have a new PC with three HDs: "C" "D" "E."
    In the "C" there is the operating system Win XP.
    I use "D" only as music deposit and avi files, etc.
    The retailer made Raid 1 in "D" HD.
    I now see everything is ok, but "D" HD works slower than others.
    In fact I see a low transfer rate in writing.
    I see in reading: 31 MB/S
    in writing: 4380 KB/S
    I have a Pentium IV 2800 MHz
    Is it a right speed?
    thanks very much

    bye Adriano
     
    Adriano, Nov 15, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Adriano

    DeMoN LaG Guest

    If the two drives making up RAID drive D: are on the same channel, you
    could very well see this. RAID1 works by writing the same data to both
    drives at the same time (mirroring). If you are writing to two drives on
    the same IDE channel then you would get poorer performance. Why are you
    using a RAID1 array to begin with though?

    --
    AIM: FrznFoodClerk (actually me)
    email: [email protected]_cast.net (_ = m)
    website: under construction
    Need a technician in the south Jersey area?
    email/IM for rates/services
     
    DeMoN LaG, Nov 15, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Adriano

    Edge Guest

    I'm getting a new system and plan to use RAID 1 for data backup. Is it true
    that RAID 1 will always be slower? Intel claims that their RAID1 will give a
    slight boost in speed. Should I instruct the system integrator to make sure
    two separate channels are used.

    TIA
     
    Edge, Nov 18, 2003
    #3
  4. Adriano

    Night_Seer Guest

    I don't see how anyone can claim that RAID 1 is faster, maybe RAID 0
    but not RAID 1. Basically you are writing the same thing twice, which
    will always be slower than writing it once. Try it with a pencil, or a
    typewriter, or even a word processor. Writing things twice usually
    takes twice as long, unless you use cut and paste, but hard drives don't
    have that option. At best you will get equal speed, as both hard drives
    might write simultaneously, but there will always be overhead of sending
    the info twice. Honestly it won't be slow either, and some RAID devices
    work pretty much at the same speed on a single channel or on 2 seperate
    ones. I would think 2 seperate ones would always be best though.
     
    Night_Seer, Nov 18, 2003
    #4
  5. The problem with your argument is that you've focussed solely on
    writing. Writing, generally, is slower with RAID 1. The only way it can
    be faster is if you're comparing different controllers, and then it's
    the controller that makes the difference, not the setup. (Many RAID
    controllers do caching, some with battery backup so you don't lose
    what's in the cache even if there's a power failure.)

    Reading's a different story though. Since you have 2 drives with the
    same data it doesn't matter which drive you read from. Assuming they're
    on different channels then you can alternate read requests between the
    drives-while one is returning the data for the first read the other is
    'enqueuing' it for the next. The result is a faster read.
     
    Calvin Crumrine, Nov 18, 2003
    #5
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.