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

New system with onboard RAID..

Options
  • 17-11-2010 9:26pm
    #1
    techguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,234 ✭✭✭


    Hey Guys,

    I'm putting together a new system using an Intel DP55KG board that has integrated raid which I plan on using for a raid-5 array.

    Just a quick question, what happens if the motherboard fails? Can I transfer the array and keep my data or will I lose my data.

    Thanks.


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    Serephucus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,180 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    Just an FYI.

    Usually if you're going for a RAID array of more than 2-3 HDDs, you're better off getting a dedicated RAID controller, as the onboard ones tend to suck.


  • Options
    #3
    techguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,234 ✭✭✭techguy


    How bad do they suck?

    I'm on a tight enough budget as it is and the dedicated cards are pretty expensive.

    Is it a case that they're not reliable or that they're just not as flexible or ideal as dedicated?


  • Options
    #4
    Serephucus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,180 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    I don't know exactly myself. There's somewhat of a RAID expert on another forum I follow, and the general rule of thumb from him is that if you go above 2-3 drives in RAID, you need a dedicated card to keep read/write speeds up.


  • Options
    #5
    Deano12345
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭Deano12345


    Serephucus wrote: »
    I don't know exactly myself. There's somewhat of a RAID expert on another forum I follow, and the general rule of thumb from him is that if you go above 2-3 drives in RAID, you need a dedicated card to keep read/write speeds up.

    The only way you'll max out any of the newer Intel SB's (or in P55 the chipset) is with either 10K + RPM drives or SSD's, the controllers can do 350mb read writes and up IME.

    Also RAID 5 is slow, depending on the number of drives I'd either just go RAID 1 or RAID 10


  • Options
    #6
    nvus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 48 ✭nvus


    RAID 1 = All Eggs in one basket
    RAID 10 = All Chickens that lay said Eggs in another basket :cool:


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuwjadbtUCY


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    techguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,234 ✭✭✭techguy


    nvus wrote: »
    RAID 1 = All Eggs in one basket
    RAID 10 = All Chickens that lay said Eggs in another basket :cool:

    Great video, thanks.

    The problem now is that I REALLY want an dedicated card!

    On the upside, it appears that with RAID 5 on the onboard chip it's only write speeds that are affected. This won't actually be a big issue as it's going to me on a media server for streaming etc. Writing won't be as much of an issue..

    And what if the motherboard fails. How can I recover my array. Just replace the board with same?


  • Options
    #8
    Serephucus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,180 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    I don't even think it would have to be the same board. I'm pretty sure RAID is RAID is RAID. I could be completely an utterly mistaken here however.


  • Options
    #9
    Deano12345
    Registered Users Posts: 1,594 ✭✭✭Deano12345


    Serephucus wrote: »
    I don't even think it would have to be the same board. I'm pretty sure RAID is RAID is RAID. I could be completely an utterly mistaken here however.

    Needs to just be the same chipset, I really do have to look into how these P55's work though, I know they integrated a lot of functions onto the chip with this generation.


  • Options
    #10
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    In my experience, if a RAID fails I've always the same chipset/card/motherboard to recover it.

    Why do you need RAID in the first place?


  • Options
    #11
    techguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,234 ✭✭✭techguy


    BostonB wrote: »
    Why do you need RAID in the first place?

    Why do I need it? To keep my data intact in the event of a drive failure?

    Why else?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Solitaire
    Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 18,377 Mod ✭✭✭✭Solitaire


    nvus wrote: »
    RAID 1 = All Eggs in one basket
    RAID 10 = All Chickens that lay said Eggs in another basket :cool:



    Um, fairly sure that RAID 1 is not keeping your eggs in one basket, its Mirror RAID, or RAID1 as in "one level of redundancy". You lose 50% capacity for increased speed and a second chance to keep your data if one of the drives is borked. What nvus is thinking about is Stripe RAID or RAID0 as in "zero-redundancy RAID". This is not true RAID as it has no redundancy, it was simply made to take advantage of the increased speed of RAID while not losing any capacity (and doubling relative chance of a critical system failure - one HDD goes, you lose data on both).


  • Options
    #13
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    techguy wrote: »
    Why do I need it? To keep my data intact in the event of a drive failure?

    Why else?

    A simple backup to another disk or two, would do that. If on a tight budget.

    You haven't mentioned what the problem is you are trying to solve.


  • Options
    #14
    Serephucus
    Registered Users Posts: 7,180 ✭✭✭Serephucus


    With my system, I have my OS on a small SSD, my apps and image files on a 7200rpm 1TB drive, and everything else on a 5400rpm 2TB drive. The last two drives are backed up to other drives of the same size using SyncToy. All drives are JBOD. I've found it to be very effective.


  • Options
    #15
    techguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,234 ✭✭✭techguy


    BostonB wrote: »
    A simple backup to another disk or two, would do that. If on a tight budget.

    You haven't mentioned what the problem is you are trying to solve.

    Actually, I'm not trying to solve a problem.. this thread was initially to find out if I could recover my array and keep data intact in the event of RAID hardware failure. I think that has been answered.
    Serephucus wrote: »
    With my system, I have my OS on a small SSD, my apps and image files on a 7200rpm 1TB drive, and everything else on a 5400rpm 2TB drive. The last two drives are backed up to other drives of the same size using SyncToy. All drives are JBOD. I've found it to be very effective.

    On my current PC the onboard RAID isn't working so i've resorted to running Robocopy a few times a day to mirror the drives. It works but has some flaws and is not ideal. RAID 1 would be much more practical IMHO..

    My initial question is for a server i'm building and I would much prefer a RAID solution.


  • Options
    #16
    old_aussie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    nvus wrote: »
    RAID 1 = All Eggs in one basket

    Wrong.

    RAID 0 is all eggs in one basket.(no redundancy)


  • Options
    #17
    BostonB
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Even with a RAID you still need a scheduled backup. RAID is not a replacement for a backup.


  • Options
    #18
    nvus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 48 ✭nvus


    Thanks all for the corrections I genuinely got my RAID's mixed but in the end the OP got the answer's s/he was looking for.
    *slaps own wrist*


Advertisement