Hardware RAID0, is this possible?

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 8, 2006, 01:35 AM

Is it possible to hardware RAID 3 SATA disks? For example put 3 250GB disks in a RAID-0 array to make 750GB? Or must it be an even number of drives for RAID-0 to work?

Matth · May 8, 2006, 06:35 PM

No reason why it shouldn't.. Intel raid apparently supports a 3 drive raid 0 array.

The more drives in a raid 0 array though, the greater chance of a single drive failure taking it down - is the data in a 3 drive raid 0 array worth the extra safety of a 4 drive raid 5 ?

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 8, 2006, 08:17 PM

Raid 5 needs 5 drives - 4 for the Raid 0 and the 5th for parity

The problem I see is how can you divide the data into 3 even chunks if the stripe sizes are all base 2? (32, 64, etc)

Judas · May 8, 2006, 08:22 PM

erm no, that's not how it works.

You can raid 0 anything from 2+ drives.

and the chunks don't work like that.

when a RAID array is created, it formats the disks in the (32,64, etc) for each drive. Most raid controller max out at 64kb block size, which is applied to every drive. So drive a get 64, b 64, c 64.

IMO 128kb or better is a hell of alot nicer (Highpoint tech so far is the only ones able to provide block sizes larger then that even, @ 2mb, you can get some pretty insane read speeds on large files)

in any case, you should have zero worries, you can even RAID drives of different size and even make let alone SATA/IDE configurations with no problems... the only setback is that if you pair up a 120gb+160gb+250gb HD, all of them will be set to the lowest/smallest HD size of the 3 (120gb) and then combined for a total of 360GB instead of the total of 530Gb. Also the larger drive will be faster, so the 120gb will be the one lagging behind.

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 8, 2006, 08:27 PM

So it then is possible to say RAID-0 three 250GB drives and get a 750GB drive array?

I would have thought that would compromise security

PangingJr · May 8, 2006, 08:48 PM

IF he uses Intel SATA RAID controller?

if so, you can configure Intel Matrix RAID to combine the benefits of two RAID levels,
RAID0 and RAID1 can be combined, where critical files can be stored on RAID1.
RAID0 and RAID5 (Parity) can also be combined to provide higher performance, capacity, and fault tolerance.

------

Judas · May 9, 2006, 01:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by H3X4D3C1M4L

So it then is possible to say RAID-0 three 250GB drives and get a 750GB drive array?

I would have thought that would compromise security

I've got 4 hardrives (all 160gb) raid 0 mode for 640Gb of total HD space.. seen as one hardrive.

Here's your chance of failure, where as like any other drive crashing, you lose ALL data.

1 HD you have a VERY low chance of failure..
2 HD basically doubles your chance of failure.... still damn low
3 HD basically triples
4 HDs Quadruples your chances of full out failure and losing your data (although it doesn't mean ALL hardrives will crash, it means ONE of the 4 will)

Even at quadruple that chance, your luck would have to be VERY bad to start out with, over a period of a few years it'll increase mind you. But i know of several people that have never had a hardrive crash, and run more then 4. Then theres those that have had nothing but issues.

In any case, Reguardless if you've got Raid 1, Raid 5 array:

BACKUP YOUR DATA ONTO SOMETHING TOTALLY RELIABLE

Be it burning a few DVDs.. or whatever.

PangingJr · May 9, 2006, 05:26 AM

for RAID5 you want to have at least an offline spare nearby.
of all the RAID levels, like Judas mentions, if you are serious about your data you want to create a backup in an external drive(s) and test the backup periodically...

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 9, 2006, 02:58 PM

I'm not actually going RAID-0 this was just to answer a question that came up

But yes I do back up (most of) my hard drives onto an external drive, which is full now. A 250GB is backing up my new 600GB of storage, a 100GB NAS drive, a 160GB Drive, and some smaller HDD's

Judas · May 9, 2006, 05:44 PM

sounds like you need more space...

setup a 1tb or better server

Ferret_Style · May 9, 2006, 06:47 PM

or just get the buffalo 1.2 TB raid 5 NAS

you can find them for about 800

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 10, 2006, 02:59 PM

Hah like I have that kind of money to spend.

The 100GB NAS is fine for just putting crap on there that people would use at LAN parties (patches for games, some musac, drivers etc), I had the drive lying around and a spare bay in my PIII server.

To be honest I'm not that worried about losing much of my 600GB array, I back it up often. The only problem is the 160GB drive in the machine upstairs, I have a Ghost of it but I need to update that image badly

But thanks for answering my question. Looks like I lose this debate with my dad

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 14, 2006, 05:38 AM

Just another question, now I'm considering RAID: If I partition on a RAID array does it hurt performance or is it like 2.5GB on one/2.5GB on the other if its a 5GB HDD?

Matth · May 14, 2006, 05:03 PM

If you partition a RAID array, it's the same as partitioning a drive ... within same partition = shorter seeks, crossing partitions = long seeks.

moeness86 · May 15, 2006, 10:35 AM

just another question :

can i have only the raid setting ?
i mean , do i have to have another Hd to boot from beside the array , or is it possible to boot directly from the array????
and does that apply also for PCI raid controllers also ?

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 15, 2006, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moeness86

just another question :

can i have only the raid setting ?
i mean , do i have to have another Hd to boot from beside the array , or is it possible to boot directly from the array????
and does that apply also for PCI raid controllers also ?

Yes and yes.

moeness86 · May 15, 2006, 09:38 PM

ty

Judas · May 15, 2006, 11:38 PM

if you setup a raid array, (say 2x 250gb).... and make a 10gb partition... 5gb is set on one drive and 5gb on the other evenly..

3 drives?

3.33^4gb on each drive..

4 drives?
2.5gb per drive...

raid 0 is built for speed.. partitioning it doesn't change any of it

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 16, 2006, 09:00 PM

That's good, I thought the partitioning screwed it up.

Gosh I'm rusty with this RAID crap.

Another question if you don't mind Judas, has RAID made a noticable difference in overall system performance, be it in hard drive specific things or just normal use (loading games etc)? Like...is it worth the extra risk if you're not a good backup taker?

Judas · May 16, 2006, 09:42 PM

general use is decent preformance.. but it REALLY depends on the raid controller your using.

imo, most of the decent raid controllers produce good results.... when it comes to the crunch though, such as moving large files around.. and using a large block size on the raid controller.. it's VERY noticeable of the speed..

Games load a bit faster, but you really see a difference when it comes to swap file if it's been arranged correctly.... stutters can mostly disappear as things load pretty much instantly

audio and video stuff... (specially video) pretty much loves anything raid for preformance..

as for backup..

i've raid for all my semi non important stuff... anything that is important i make a duplicate every once in awhile and transfer it to my important drive
for example...

my server has 1 drive by itself... and 2 drives in raid 0... my windows and programs and important files remain on the single drive... where things that are being accessed alot reside on the raid (with the first partition on the raid drive being the swap file dedicated 5gb partition)

The rest on that drive is like game files and videos and various other non important stuff.... that i'm willing to lose.

but your chances of having a hardrive fail is extremely low.....

PangingJr · May 16, 2006, 10:06 PM

zip/rar some files on one partition or copy some files across partitions, and at same time play some different movie files on every partition that exists in the RAID volume. try this out for a comparison of a single drive with multiple partitions??

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 16, 2006, 10:23 PM

I just wanted a "relative" idea not exact numbers, I got Google for that

But thanks to all for the info. Looks like RAID it is

PangingJr · May 16, 2006, 10:46 PM

well, that's a relative idea really, don't need to get the exact numbers.
but if you don't see/feel the different of the disk performance between a non-Raid drive and RAID0 drive then you don't want to use Raid on the system.

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 17, 2006, 08:36 PM

True enough

PangingJr · May 17, 2006, 09:43 PM

anyway, if you have 4 drives and you want to use all of them on the onboard Raid controller, try them all, from 2x, 3x and 4x drives, try the default/recommened stripe size first. then also try 2 array(s) with 2x drives on each array if the controller and its BIOS/firmware allows you to do it.
and then if you can create multiple volumes (not disk partition) on the Raid array you may want to try this type of setup also, since you can rebuild each Raid volume separately.

but in all cases, you want to actually perform an actual test on the Raid array(s), and also across the volumes in the Raid array and/or partitions in the Raid volumes... depending on the tasks and apps that you'd normally do/use... sometimes you won't see a big performance gain on your system but the Windows and some programs loads faster than before, or you might find that just 2 drives for Raid array is fast enough and more useful than using all 4 drives.

and anyway, if the system is a home computer, i'd use only RAID0, just tranfer your important files on to some USB/Firewire hard drives and keep the drives offline.

H3X4D3C1M4L · May 17, 2006, 09:53 PM

I try to do that anyway, just I'm not the best at backing things up when there are video games that need playing

I only have 2 SATA RAID ports on my mobo so that's all I can use, but thanks to all for the help

May 8, 2006, 01:35 AM	#1
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	Hardware RAID0, is this possible? Is it possible to hardware RAID 3 SATA disks? For example put 3 250GB disks in a RAID-0 array to make 750GB? Or must it be an even number of drives for RAID-0 to work?

May 8, 2006, 06:35 PM	#2
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	No reason why it shouldn't.. Intel raid apparently supports a 3 drive raid 0 array. The more drives in a raid 0 array though, the greater chance of a single drive failure taking it down - is the data in a 3 drive raid 0 array worth the extra safety of a 4 drive raid 5 ? __________________ Mary had a little lamb, Her father shot it dead Now Mary takes her lamb to school, Between two crusts of bread

May 14, 2006, 05:03 PM	#14
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	If you partition a RAID array, it's the same as partitioning a drive ... within same partition = shorter seeks, crossing partitions = long seeks. __________________ Mary had a little lamb, Her father shot it dead Now Mary takes her lamb to school, Between two crusts of bread

May 15, 2006, 10:35 AM	#15
moeness86 DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Cairo Posts: 75 Rep Power: 0	just another question : can i have only the raid setting ? i mean , do i have to have another Hd to boot from beside the array , or is it possible to boot directly from the array???? and does that apply also for PCI raid controllers also ? __________________

May 15, 2006, 09:38 PM	#17
moeness86 DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: Cairo Posts: 75 Rep Power: 0	ty __________________

May 8, 2006, 08:17 PM	Thread Starter #3
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	Raid 5 needs 5 drives - 4 for the Raid 0 and the 5th for parity The problem I see is how can you divide the data into 3 even chunks if the stripe sizes are all base 2? (32, 64, etc)

May 8, 2006, 08:27 PM	Thread Starter #5
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	So it then is possible to say RAID-0 three 250GB drives and get a 750GB drive array? I would have thought that would compromise security

May 8, 2006, 08:48 PM	#6
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	IF he uses Intel SATA RAID controller? if so, you can configure Intel Matrix RAID to combine the benefits of two RAID levels, RAID0 and RAID1 can be combined, where critical files can be stored on RAID1. RAID0 and RAID5 (Parity) can also be combined to provide higher performance, capacity, and fault tolerance. ------

May 9, 2006, 05:26 AM	#8
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	for RAID5 you want to have at least an offline spare nearby. of all the RAID levels, like Judas mentions, if you are serious about your data you want to create a backup in an external drive(s) and test the backup periodically...

May 9, 2006, 02:58 PM	Thread Starter #9
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	I'm not actually going RAID-0 this was just to answer a question that came up But yes I do back up (most of) my hard drives onto an external drive, which is full now. A 250GB is backing up my new 600GB of storage, a 100GB NAS drive, a 160GB Drive, and some smaller HDD's

May 10, 2006, 02:59 PM	Thread Starter #12
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	Hah like I have that kind of money to spend. The 100GB NAS is fine for just putting crap on there that people would use at LAN parties (patches for games, some musac, drivers etc), I had the drive lying around and a spare bay in my PIII server. To be honest I'm not that worried about losing much of my 600GB array, I back it up often. The only problem is the 160GB drive in the machine upstairs, I have a Ghost of it but I need to update that image badly But thanks for answering my question. Looks like I lose this debate with my dad

May 14, 2006, 05:38 AM	Thread Starter #13
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	Just another question, now I'm considering RAID: If I partition on a RAID array does it hurt performance or is it like 2.5GB on one/2.5GB on the other if its a 5GB HDD?

May 16, 2006, 09:00 PM	Thread Starter #19
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	That's good, I thought the partitioning screwed it up. Gosh I'm rusty with this RAID crap. Another question if you don't mind Judas, has RAID made a noticable difference in overall system performance, be it in hard drive specific things or just normal use (loading games etc)? Like...is it worth the extra risk if you're not a good backup taker?

May 16, 2006, 10:06 PM	#21
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	zip/rar some files on one partition or copy some files across partitions, and at same time play some different movie files on every partition that exists in the RAID volume. try this out for a comparison of a single drive with multiple partitions??

May 16, 2006, 10:23 PM	Thread Starter #22
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	I just wanted a "relative" idea not exact numbers, I got Google for that But thanks to all for the info. Looks like RAID it is

May 16, 2006, 10:46 PM	#23
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	well, that's a relative idea really, don't need to get the exact numbers. but if you don't see/feel the different of the disk performance between a non-Raid drive and RAID0 drive then you don't want to use Raid on the system.

May 17, 2006, 08:36 PM	Thread Starter #24
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	True enough

May 17, 2006, 09:43 PM	#25
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	anyway, if you have 4 drives and you want to use all of them on the onboard Raid controller, try them all, from 2x, 3x and 4x drives, try the default/recommened stripe size first. then also try 2 array(s) with 2x drives on each array if the controller and its BIOS/firmware allows you to do it. and then if you can create multiple volumes (not disk partition) on the Raid array you may want to try this type of setup also, since you can rebuild each Raid volume separately. but in all cases, you want to actually perform an actual test on the Raid array(s), and also across the volumes in the Raid array and/or partitions in the Raid volumes... depending on the tasks and apps that you'd normally do/use... sometimes you won't see a big performance gain on your system but the Windows and some programs loads faster than before, or you might find that just 2 drives for Raid array is fast enough and more useful than using all 4 drives. and anyway, if the system is a home computer, i'd use only RAID0, just tranfer your important files on to some USB/Firewire hard drives and keep the drives offline.

May 17, 2006, 09:53 PM	Thread Starter #26
H3X4D3C1M4L DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 6,794 Rep Power: 0	I try to do that anyway, just I'm not the best at backing things up when there are video games that need playing I only have 2 SATA RAID ports on my mobo so that's all I can use, but thanks to all for the help