Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

RAID Setup

  • 06-02-2008 10:04pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 611 ✭✭✭


    Okay I have 2 X 200GB Samsung spinpoints and 2 X 160GB Seagate's and was thinking of placing the 2 samsungs in RAID 0(OS) and then placing the 2 seagates in RAID 0 as well.

    Then using a software RAID to backup the samsungs onto the seagates. Can anyone suggest a better solution cause i'm looking for a combination of both speed and security.

    Can I use them all in a RAID 5?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,967 ✭✭✭trellheim


    yes ... but you should do raid 10 instead for the highest speed and security.


    if you do a raid10 block you'll get max 320G but you'd be better doing it in hardware RAID10

    you don't mention the bus type ide sata scsi or whatever , or the model types of the drives and spins etc.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 611 ✭✭✭requiem1


    trellheim wrote: »
    yes ... but you should do raid 10 instead for the highest speed and security.


    if you do a raid10 block you'll get max 320G but you'd be better doing it in hardware RAID10

    you don't mention the bus type ide sata scsi or whatever , or the model types of the drives and spins etc.

    They're all SATA and 7200rpm, i can't remember the specific model numbers. If i put it in RAID 10 is that striping the two seagates and mirroring them with samsungs? or vice versa? cause the samsungs are faster performance wise


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,485 ✭✭✭✭Khannie


    If you want to do raid 10, you should stripe a 200 and a 160, then mirror that with another 200 + 160. This will give you the most consistent performance. It's not an ideal scenario, but you will get plenty of speed out of it.

    The alternative is to use 3 drives in a raid 0 config (2 x 160 + 200), and keep the 4th one for backing up your OS and any important files. 3 drives in raid 0 would be very fast.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 611 ✭✭✭requiem1


    thanks for the opinions i would be interested more in performance but had always been under the illusion that you needed identical models to create a RAID but if i can use contrasting disks that'd be far better. In creating a 3 disk RAID 0 would i have to partition the 200GB to 160GB? or would i have a total volume of 520 GB?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,485 ✭✭✭✭Khannie


    it'd be 480G, 3 x 160. You'd lose 40G of storage, but given what you have, I wouldn't think that'd be a big issue.

    Just in case you're not aware of this: With a 3 drive raid 0 array, your chances of catastrophic data loss are 3 x what you would have with 1 drive. That's why I'm suggesting you hold back one drive for backup purposes.

    You could go with raid 5 and have the same amount of space with the redundancy that raid 5 offers and some very nice performance. I use raid 5 myself and love it (but not for my OS drive).


  • Advertisement
Advertisement