Raid question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alberto
  • Start date Start date
A

Alberto

Hi all.
I'm just back from a RAID 0 configuration.
I have a ASUS P4P800-SE as MB, P4 3.2 Ghz, last BIOS UPDATE, I have 2 HDD :
MAXTOR 6Y160M0 SATA, that I have configured as 1 "RAID 0" disk, the result
was terrible, sometime CHKDISK was starting by itself, and I have lost some
data so I'm back to use NORMAL disks.
I don't know if RAID 0 is really so instable (or this was only a problem of
mine) but I'd like to know which is the best (within a common system) RAID
configuration (0+1, 5, 10 ecc ecc)
I'd like also to know if someone else have had these kind of problem with
raid 0 config and this MB.

Thank
 
Your problem are not due to RAID0.

RAID0 = single drive, no protection
RAID1 = drives in pairs, mirrored. OS only sees one. If one fails, you
still have a working system
RAID5 = at least 3 drives. 1 in the array is lost to parity. Cheaper than
RAID1 if you need multiple drives to acheive capacity. OS sees only large
drive. Can survive failure of one drive, but with performance decrease as
it needs to rebuild data on the fly. Write speeds can suffer unless the
controller has a large enough cache.
RADI10 = essentially 2 RAID5 arrays in a mirrored pair.
 
RAID0 is striping the data across two hard drives to improve read/write
times. In RAID0, the data stream is split in twain and different parts of it
are written to each drive. The RAID controller essentially converts the two
separate drives into one large one. This is perhaps the most dangerous
version of RAID as if only one drive fails, the data is lost, there is no
mirror in this configuration. If a drive is faulty, all kinds of problems
can occur. I would speculate that the user's problems were due to a faulty
raid controller.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
Raid 0 is additive (2x160=320Gb) with no protection. Advantage: speed
Raid 1 is parallel (2x160=160Gb) with each disk having identical
information. Disadvantage: not as fast.

For my money, data integrity easily outweighs slight speed advantage, You're
already speeding things up with SATA, so my advice would be to use Raid 1.

However, I've had bad luck with Maxtor drives even in Raid 1 configuration.
The Raid took a while to set up, the mirror seemed to break several times,
and after a period of time, one of the drives completely crashed and I
nearly lost everything. The OS partition on BOTH drives was totaled and only
because I use multiple partitions with the data segragated from everything
else did I manage to save my data. It still required an OS re-install on the
one good remaining drive but I finally gor everything back. I've had 3
different Maxtor drives fail on me at various times, and I will never again
buy another Maxtor.

Hopefully you'll have better luck, but strongly suggest either keep drives
as singles, or Raid 1.
 
Raid 0 is additive (2x160=320Gb) with no protection. Advantage: speed
Raid 1 is parallel (2x160=160Gb) with each disk having identical
information. Disadvantage: not as fast.
Click to expand...

RAID 1 is faster than RAID 0 since both drives seek on read and the data
is returned from the first one that responds.
 
Reading from Raid 0 is faster since you have 2 drives retreiving the parts
of the information you've asked for.
Writing to Raid 1 is definitely slower since it has to write the same
information to 2 drives.
 
RAID 1 is faster than RAID 0 since both drives seek on read and the data
is returned from the first one that responds.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, it is slower. In Raid1 you are writing the entire data set to two
drives simultaneously. In Raid0 you are writing half of the data set to each
drive simultaneously. If it takes "x" ns to write the data set, it will
still take "x" ns to write it in Raid1, in Raid0 it will take "x/2" ns, or
half the time.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP

Associate Expert - WindowsXP Expert Zone

Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
 
It should work OK if you installed the Raid drivers and modified the
necessary BIOS settings.; best is to do a clean install of XP when switching
to Raid0.
I've been running 2x200GB SATA Barracuda in Raid0 on ICH5R (Asus P4C800ED)
for 2 years now without a problem - I installed a 400GB SATA Cuda for backup
on this horrible Promise controller, though.

So, if you run Raid on onboard Promise controller, it sucks. Have the latest
BIOS from Asus (they also have the Promise drivers embeded), and, important,
check the Asus SATA cables - they aren't reliable - don't make contact all
the time. Another thing to check is the PSU - enough watts.
Michael
 
Yes yes ... this seems realistic.
I'm using ORIGINAL ASUS CABLE, my MOBO use ICH5R controller and I have :

3 HDD + P4 478 3.2 Ghz + ATI 9600 XT + 2 GB RAM and a 500 W PSU

By the way often my system does not start and I have to press the HW reset
button to start it ( I have just upgraded from a 300 W PSU to this one of
500 W).

Any comment ?

Albert
 
Well, download a hdd utility and check the speed of each; raid0 is faster -
depends the size of chunks and or files that get broken to be distributed on
drives.
More, you assume Raid0 is made of 2 drives... you can use up to 4 - if not
more.
Michael
 
If it's on ICH5R you should have no problems at all.
Again, get the latest BIOS via Asus Update tool, get Intel Inf Chip from
Intel (latest it's OK), set the Raid in BIOS (Config. SATA as Raid, and SATA
Bootrom = yes), reboot, set Boot order and you should be OK; guess you did
this already anyway.
If one of your drives in Raid is "not online," check the cables (SATA,
power), reboot. You can also try to "Rebuild the array" - Ctrl-I at Intel
Raid Screen at boot - (or such) but do not delete anything... just exit.
Just google for your mobo name and raid0... you'll find plenty user tips.
Michael
 
which raid card you suggest for SATA?

i bought very cheap raid 0 & 1 card without memory onboard.

somebody told me it is software raid, it will lose everything even it is
raid 1

tony
 
Depends how many ports, how much you want to spend - $30 to $625! Google for
"sata pci card."
Michael
 
Asher_N said:
RAID 1 is faster than RAID 0 since both drives seek on read and the data
is returned from the first one that responds.
Click to expand...


Umm, no its not. RAID0, when working properly is almost always faster than
RAID1, given identical drives. True, both disks in a RAID 1 mirror seek the
data at the same time, but its usually found by one within nanoseconds of
the other. At that level, its purely a mechanical issue of which drive's
heads get there first. With RAID0, seek times are usually the same but the
actual transfer times are significantly faster as the alternating blocks of
data are being streamed from both drives at the same time.
 
Memory on the RAID card helps with caching frequently accessed data. Its
still a hardware RAID with or without the memory. Most consumer-level
motherboard integrated RAID controllers do not have memory. Software RAID is
when the OS controls the disk/volume. If you use RAID1 on a controller
without memory, you will not lose everything if 1 disk fails.
 
Back
Top