SATA Drives, non RAID

  • Thread starter Thread starter John Hollingsworth
  • Start date Start date
RAID 1 does NOT take the place of backup. RAID 0 is fast but
anti-reliable.
Using D: as an independent drive(JBOD) and then putting Ghost images is
a
fair kind of backup. Much better would be to put D: drive into a
removable
shock-mount tray like KingWin KF-83 (~$30) and turn it off and better
yet
keep it in the car while not in use.
Click to expand...
I get your point, thanks. As well as the C: Ghosts to D:, I currently also
backup all data from D: to my #2 PC every hour using Second Copy. I take
your point completely about the external disk etc. as I did at work, but
for home use there is a limit.

Thanks

John

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
 
I've just ordered an A8V board and 2 x 160GB SATA drives.

If I want to use them as straight forward C: and D: drives, which is
the best method to do this?

Thanks.

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
Click to expand...
Thanks everyone for your most helpful comments. Although there is some
disagreement around, the points raised have increased my understanding and
shown me what to look for.

I intend to build the system, try RAID-1 and also plain C: and D: and see
what happens with perhaps just Photoshop loaded. I'll then decide which is
best and do a full load.

At present, I suspect I will end up with my current type of system. I
should have mentioned I back up data to my #2 PC every hour.

Thanks again :-)

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
 
John Hollingsworth said:
I get your point, thanks. As well as the C: Ghosts to D:, I currently also
backup all data from D: to my #2 PC every hour using Second Copy. I take
your point completely about the external disk etc. as I did at work, but
for home use there is a limit.
Click to expand...

There shouldn't be regarding backup.
 
Nope, there's a wide range of users that see significant noticable
improvement from RAID 0 not the least of which are desktop video folks.


Nope, the chance of the failure of a RAID 0 array with two drives is about
double that of a single drive. In a RAID 0 array the chances of any drive
failing remains unchanged.
Click to expand...

Inasmuch as a RAID 0 array does the job that a single disc would be
doing otherwise, I think you just said what I said, didn't you??

Ron
 
Milleron said:
Inasmuch as a RAID 0 array does the job that a single disc would be
doing otherwise, I think you just said what I said, didn't you??
Click to expand...

Not exactly which is why I posted a very precise statement on the issue.
 
Software RAID-1 under Solaris (i.e. DiskSuite) uses round-robin reads
to the drives in the array; the read performance a RAID-1 on an MSI
motherboard at work (Promise RAID controller, I think) was substantially
better than with a single drive, so I assume it uses a similar arrangement.
This only applies to reads (in particular sequential reads) - writes have
to go to both drives, and would be slightly worse than a single drive due
to the RAID overheads.
Click to expand...

I stand corrected! Thanks very much for the explanation.
Ron
 
Back
Top