Raid X


Status
Not open for further replies.

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#1
Where 0 <= X <= 5.

I don't think polls are going to be useful because probably after selecting, nobody replies.

Just a quick question, how many of you here are running RAID systems? Now considering to do a RAID 1 on my system but thinking about the costs is making me hesitative.

Thought of doing RAID 5 but think it might be overkill. :dunno:
 

Joeyboi

New Member
Oct 14, 2004
77
0
0
#2
Mai tu laio... go for SCSI RAID 5.....
if budget not there.. then go for RAID 0+1
If super low budget.. then RAID 1 lo..
but best one still RAID 5.... better... but for the IDE controller for RAID 5 is expensive......
 

ericp

New Member
Apr 27, 2003
577
0
0
Visit site
#3
Disks=cheap
Data=priceless

I'm going to do a RAID 1 setup once I get off my butt and clean up 2 x 120GB drives that I have. My motherboard (getting a bit long in the tooth) has RAID 0 & 1 onboard.

Do you have a RAID 5 controller already ?
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#4
Haha I knew somebody was going to recommend me RAID 5 SCSI. Sorry but don't have that kind of juice to run SCSI RAID 5 ;)

Nope, I currently don't have RAID 5 controller, but shouldn't be too difficult getting one. My current board supports SATA/PATA RAID 0, 1, 0+1 though. Was thinking of going for RAID 1 for safety. But since minimum 3HDDs for RAID 5... so.... :think:
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#6
Interesting :think: but currently I only intend to run 2 x 200GB HDD :)
 

Drudkh

Senior Member
Mar 2, 2004
6,129
0
0
lulu island
#7
2 HDDs?
performance - RAID 0
reliability - RAID 1

RAID 0+1/1+0 requires 4 HDDs.
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#8
I'm going for reliability, if that's the case pretty obvious ... :think:
 

Jayson

New Member
May 21, 2004
74
0
0
#9
Don't need moolah, XP pro supports software raid 5 .. IIRC

anyway I'd recomand raid 5 too save money don't use scsi
 

Joeyboi

New Member
Oct 14, 2004
77
0
0
#10
Jayson said:
Don't need moolah, XP pro supports software raid 5 .. IIRC

anyway I'd recomand raid 5 too save money don't use scsi

Please do not use software RAID.. it sucks... first, it consume your CPU resources.. and second.... NOT THAT RELIABLE..... yes.. performance is RAID 0, security is RAID 1 so you want security plus performance.. RAID 1+0 is not worth.. because minimum is 4 HDD!!! if you want performance plus security.. get RAID 5... minimum 3HDD but worth it... if you do not prefer hardware RAID and go for software RAID.. can.... but the security still not there.. i hit the problem b4 and that is my 2 cents worth of opinion.....

There is avialable for RAID 5 hardware controller available for both PATA and SATA... suggest to go and buy it.. worth for it....
 

Joeyboi

New Member
Oct 14, 2004
77
0
0
#11
espn said:
Interesting :think: but currently I only intend to run 2 x 200GB HDD :)
then from that i c the solution is clear.. only RAID 1 lo..... :D
 

Jayson

New Member
May 21, 2004
74
0
0
#13
actually most ide hardware raid still uses your cpu for processing.

and I think for raid 5 you can use a smaller 3rd hdd.
 

jbma

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2003
3,287
0
0
Tampines
#15
I have been using Raid 5 at home for 3 years now and many times it has saved my ass. I have 6 x 200 GB hard disk on my pc with 2 GB of RAM. I know this may be an overkill to some but I need the space as I do video editing. You will need extra fans to cool the unit down. I used to keep on adding hard disk (80, 120 GB etc) then decided once and for all I need something that will last me for a long time. Now I have no worries.
 

Joeyboi

New Member
Oct 14, 2004
77
0
0
#16
Jayson said:
actually most ide hardware raid still uses your cpu for processing.

and I think for raid 5 you can use a smaller 3rd hdd.
yes for IDE yes... that's y that is very important to use the HW RAID instead of SW RAID, SW RAID will tax ur CPU resources even worst.

As for the RAID 5 HDD, you need to use all 3 HDD all in SAME size. cannot be two 200 G and one 100G. If better, use all 3 in term of same brand and same model, to ensure the performance.
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,905
0
0
Planet Nikon
#17
Heheh.. I definitely won't go for software RAID. It still sux to me. Heehee.
 

Joeyboi

New Member
Oct 14, 2004
77
0
0
#19
jbma said:
I have been using Raid 5 at home for 3 years now and many times it has saved my ass. I have 6 x 200 GB hard disk on my pc with 2 GB of RAM. I know this may be an overkill to some but I need the space as I do video editing. You will need extra fans to cool the unit down. I used to keep on adding hard disk (80, 120 GB etc) then decided once and for all I need something that will last me for a long time. Now I have no worries.
:thumbsup: good neh.... wish to use 2G RAM now.... sigh.. but no $$$ :cry:
ya is goot o use RAID 1 or RAID 5.. nowsday HDD is more and more fragile laio... the MTBF for HDD getting shorter and short.. sigh.... sad.... but too poor to get SCSI HDD laio...
 

Joeyboi

New Member
Oct 14, 2004
77
0
0
#20
so espn,
mai tu laio.. go for RAID 5... better if you go for SCSI one...... heheheh :bsmilie: :bsmilie: :bsmilie:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom