SATA Drives, non RAID

Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

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.
26 answers Last reply
More about sata drives raid
  1. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > 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?

    If you have the latest BIOS (1006) and drivers, it should be Plug n' Play.
    There's a BIOS option to select between RAID and non-RAID mode for one of
    the controllers (I forget if it's the Promise or VIA Southbridge.)

    Since you have two drives, why not use RAID-0 (striping) for increased
    performance, or RAID-1 (mirroring) for redundancy?

    --

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I ticked.
  2. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <cNsNc.130$QW4.7342@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>,
    birder@ozemail.com.au (Paul Taylor) wrote:

    > John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > > 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?
    >
    > If you have the latest BIOS (1006) and drivers, it should be Plug n'
    > Play.
    > There's a BIOS option to select between RAID and non-RAID mode for one
    > of
    > the controllers (I forget if it's the Promise or VIA Southbridge.)
    >
    > Since you have two drives, why not use RAID-0 (striping) for increased
    > performance, or RAID-1 (mirroring) for redundancy?
    >
    > --
    >
    > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    > -=-
    > Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    > birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I
    > ticked.
    >
    Ah - thanks Paul. I've down loaded the manual which doesn't make that
    clear.

    I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C: and
    D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D: each
    week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.

    I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup unless
    I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    What would you advise?

    Thanks :-)

    John

    Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
  3. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C: and
    > D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D: each
    > week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    >
    > I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup unless
    > I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    > What would you advise?

    I haven't tried any RAID configurations on the A8V - I only have one drive.
    :-/

    Based on an MSI Pentium 4 system at work that's running RedHat 9 on a pair
    of mirrored disks, RAID-1 (mirroring) should give you nearly double the
    read performance and about the same write performance, while still
    protecting against one of the disks failing. (In theory - never tried it
    in anger...) You only get one disk's worth of storage capacity, though.

    If you're only interested in speed, RAID-0 (striping) should give you an
    increase in both read and write speeds, but with no protection against
    a disk failure.

    Since you're starting from a clean slate, try a few options and let us
    know what you discover. :-)

    --

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I ticked.
  4. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <BrtNc.137$QW4.7648@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>,
    birder@ozemail.com.au (Paul Taylor) wrote:

    > John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > > I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C:
    > > and D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to
    > > D: each week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too. > > I would like
    > > > > to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup unless I
    > > buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    > > What would you advise?
    >
    > I haven't tried any RAID configurations on the A8V - I only have one
    > drive.
    > :-/
    >
    > Based on an MSI Pentium 4 system at work that's running RedHat 9 on a
    > pair
    > of mirrored disks, RAID-1 (mirroring) should give you nearly double the
    > read performance and about the same write performance, while still
    > protecting against one of the disks failing. (In theory - never tried
    > it
    > in anger...) You only get one disk's worth of storage capacity, though.
    >
    > If you're only interested in speed, RAID-0 (striping) should give you an
    > increase in both read and write speeds, but with no protection against
    > a disk failure.
    >
    > Since you're starting from a clean slate, try a few options and let us
    > know what you discover. :-)
    >
    > --
    >
    > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    > -=-
    > Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    > birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I
    > ticked.
    >
    Thanks. So I'm to be a guinea pig, eh? ;-)

    John

    Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Paul Taylor wrote:

    > If you're only interested in speed, RAID-0 (striping) should give you
    > an increase in both read and write speeds, but with no protection
    > against
    > a disk failure.

    I think it is not so smart advicing people to run RAID0 when they only want
    to hook up a couple of drives.

    I believe in Storagereview as an authority and I want to direct attention to
    their website.

    http://www.storagereview.com/

    Especially the frontpage news:

    Quote:"Stop the RAID0 Insanity! 02 July 2004

    In February of 2003, we took a brief time-out from our standard,
    single-drive testing to formally address what we normally refuse to touch
    with a 12-foot pole- a RAID0 array. Why? The StorageReview Discussion
    community, mirroring forums around the net, burgeoned with hundreds of posts
    from readers seeking advice on which RAID adapter to get and which hard
    drives to stripe for their power rigs.
    Simple theory, however, indicated that striping would not
    significantly help the localized (as opposed to both random and sequential),
    low-depth usage that dominated even highly-multitasked, single-user
    scenarios. The best advice, as a result, was to avoid striping. Many
    readers, however refused to believe."


    begin 666 spacer.gif
    M1TE&.#EA"@`*`(#_`,# P ```"'Y! $`````+ `````*``H`0 ((A(^IR^T/
    $8RL`.P``
    `
    end
  6. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > Thanks. So I'm to be a guinea pig, eh? ;-)

    Yep! "Your mission, should you choose to accept it..." ;-)

    --

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I ticked.
  7. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <ZauNc.161$QW4.7947@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>,
    birder@ozemail.com.au (Paul Taylor) wrote:

    > John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > > Thanks. So I'm to be a guinea pig, eh? ;-)
    >
    > Yep! "Your mission, should you choose to accept it..." ;-)
    >

    :-)

    John

    Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
  8. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 14:46 +0100 (BST), jwhNO-SPAM@cix.co.uk (John
    Hollingsworth) wrote:

    >In article <cNsNc.130$QW4.7342@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>,
    >birder@ozemail.com.au (Paul Taylor) wrote:
    >
    >> John Hollingsworth wrote:
    >> > 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?
    >>
    >> If you have the latest BIOS (1006) and drivers, it should be Plug n'
    >> Play.
    >> There's a BIOS option to select between RAID and non-RAID mode for one
    >> of
    >> the controllers (I forget if it's the Promise or VIA Southbridge.)
    >>
    >> Since you have two drives, why not use RAID-0 (striping) for increased
    >> performance, or RAID-1 (mirroring) for redundancy?
    >>
    >> --
    >>
    >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    >> -=-
    >> Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    >> birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I
    >> ticked.
    >>
    >Ah - thanks Paul. I've down loaded the manual which doesn't make that
    >clear.
    >
    >I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C: and
    >D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D: each
    >week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    >
    >I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup unless
    >I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    >What would you advise?

    Do it the way you originally planned. RAID 0 will improve performance
    but NOT PERCEPTIBLY -- i.e., you'd have to use a disk benchmarking
    program to document it -- AND RAID 0 will double the chance of a HD
    failure. Your present setup is the best. This will probably start
    another flame war, but unless you are doing a lot of video processing,
    working with really huge graphic files, or building a server, you'll
    be much better off without RAID 0.
    Ron
  9. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:15:34 +1000, Paul Taylor
    <birder@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

    >John Hollingsworth wrote:
    >> I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C: and
    >> D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D: each
    >> week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    >>
    >> I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup unless
    >> I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    >> What would you advise?
    >
    >I haven't tried any RAID configurations on the A8V - I only have one drive.
    >:-/
    >
    >Based on an MSI Pentium 4 system at work that's running RedHat 9 on a pair
    >of mirrored disks, RAID-1 (mirroring) should give you nearly double the
    >read performance and about the same write performance, while still
    >protecting against one of the disks failing. (In theory - never tried it
    >in anger...) You only get one disk's worth of storage capacity, though.

    Now, how in the world could RAID 1 give ANY increase in read
    performance, let alone "double" the rate?? If we're talking about
    theory, the latency in the RAID controller could only SLOW BOTH read
    and write performance.

    snip

    Ron
  10. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Tue, 27 Jul 2004 19:26:33 +0200, "Egil Solberg"
    <egilso@hotmail.com> wrote:

    >Paul Taylor wrote:
    >
    >> If you're only interested in speed, RAID-0 (striping) should give you
    >> an increase in both read and write speeds, but with no protection
    >> against
    >> a disk failure.
    >
    >I think it is not so smart advicing people to run RAID0 when they only want
    >to hook up a couple of drives.
    >
    >I believe in Storagereview as an authority and I want to direct attention to
    >their website.
    >
    >http://www.storagereview.com/
    >
    >Especially the frontpage news:
    >
    >Quote:"Stop the RAID0 Insanity! 02 July 2004
    >
    > In February of 2003, we took a brief time-out from our standard,
    >single-drive testing to formally address what we normally refuse to touch
    >with a 12-foot pole- a RAID0 array. Why? The StorageReview Discussion
    >community, mirroring forums around the net, burgeoned with hundreds of posts
    >from readers seeking advice on which RAID adapter to get and which hard
    >drives to stripe for their power rigs.
    > Simple theory, however, indicated that striping would not
    >significantly help the localized (as opposed to both random and sequential),
    >low-depth usage that dominated even highly-multitasked, single-user
    >scenarios. The best advice, as a result, was to avoid striping. Many
    >readers, however refused to believe."

    Here, here!! Best advice I've seen in days! Thanks for yet another
    published bash of RAID 0 in single-user desktops.
    RAID 0 in this scenario has received a huge boost recently from the
    inclusion of RAID controllers on most boards marketed to enthusiasts.
    Why the manufacturers did this, I've no idea, but placing RAID
    controllers on the board doesn't mean one should use them any more
    than including a Firewire connection means one should use Firewire
    drives.
    I don't call it "RAID 0 Insanity." I think "RAID 0 hysteria" is a
    more apt description of this unfortunate trend, and I rather hope that
    it will fade away.
    However, so many of us are gadgeteers at heart that many will not be
    able to resist that shiny new "go-faster thingy" on the MB, even if it
    is nonsense for the vast majority of us.
    Ron
  11. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "John Hollingsworth" <jwhNO-SPAM@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
    news:memo.20040727144613.3512C@jwh.compulink.co.uk...
    > In article <cNsNc.130$QW4.7342@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>,
    > birder@ozemail.com.au (Paul Taylor) wrote:
    >
    > > John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > > > 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?
    > >
    > > If you have the latest BIOS (1006) and drivers, it should be Plug n'
    > > Play.
    > > There's a BIOS option to select between RAID and non-RAID mode for one
    > > of
    > > the controllers (I forget if it's the Promise or VIA Southbridge.)
    > >
    > > Since you have two drives, why not use RAID-0 (striping) for increased
    > > performance, or RAID-1 (mirroring) for redundancy?
    > >
    > > --
    > >
    > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    > > -=-
    > > Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    > > birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I
    > > ticked.
    > >
    > Ah - thanks Paul. I've down loaded the manual which doesn't make that
    > clear.
    >
    > I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C: and
    > D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D: each
    > week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    >
    > I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup unless
    > I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    > What would you advise?

    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.
  12. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Paul Taylor" <birder@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
    news:BrtNc.137$QW4.7648@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
    > John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > > I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C: and
    > > D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D: each
    > > week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    > >
    > > I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup
    unless
    > > I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    > > What would you advise?
    >
    > I haven't tried any RAID configurations on the A8V - I only have one
    drive.
    > :-/
    >
    > Based on an MSI Pentium 4 system at work that's running RedHat 9 on a pair
    > of mirrored disks, RAID-1 (mirroring) should give you nearly double the
    > read performance

    No, that's only in heavily multitasked situations unlike what a usual
    desktop sees.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Egil Solberg" <egilso@hotmail.com> wrote in message
    news:2mnhi3Fo9s7mU1@uni-berlin.de...
    > Paul Taylor wrote:
    >
    > > If you're only interested in speed, RAID-0 (striping) should give you
    > > an increase in both read and write speeds, but with no protection
    > > against
    > > a disk failure.
    >
    > I think it is not so smart advicing people to run RAID0 when they only
    want
    > to hook up a couple of drives.
    >
    > I believe in Storagereview as an authority and I want to direct attention
    to
    > their website.
    >
    > http://www.storagereview.com/
    >
    > Especially the frontpage news:
    >
    > Quote:"Stop the RAID0 Insanity! 02 July 2004
    >
    > In February of 2003, we took a brief time-out from our standard,
    > single-drive testing to formally address what we normally refuse to touch
    > with a 12-foot pole- a RAID0 array. Why? The StorageReview Discussion
    > community, mirroring forums around the net, burgeoned with hundreds of
    posts
    > from readers seeking advice on which RAID adapter to get and which hard
    > drives to stripe for their power rigs.
    > Simple theory, however, indicated that striping would not
    > significantly help the localized (as opposed to both random and
    sequential),
    > low-depth usage that dominated even highly-multitasked, single-user
    > scenarios. The best advice, as a result, was to avoid striping. Many
    > readers, however refused to believe."

    The methodology in that analysis is suspect.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Milleron" <millerdot90@SPAMlessosu.edu> wrote in message
    news:f55gg0hsd716vn9jd1ecigs2or80d41aht@4ax.com...
    > Do it the way you originally planned. RAID 0 will improve performance
    > but NOT PERCEPTIBLY -- i.e., you'd have to use a disk benchmarking
    > program to document it


    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.

    > -- AND RAID 0 will double the chance of a HD
    > failure.

    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.
  15. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Milleron" <millerdot90@SPAMlessosu.edu> wrote in message
    news:pd5gg051aabaq3tqa8tjbajg3ot2q2oe4u@4ax.com...
    > On Wed, 28 Jul 2004 00:15:34 +1000, Paul Taylor
    > <birder@ozemail.com.au> wrote:
    >
    > >John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > >> I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C:
    and
    > >> D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D:
    each
    > >> week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    > >>
    > >> I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup
    unless
    > >> I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    > >> What would you advise?
    > >
    > >I haven't tried any RAID configurations on the A8V - I only have one
    drive.
    > >:-/
    > >
    > >Based on an MSI Pentium 4 system at work that's running RedHat 9 on a
    pair
    > >of mirrored disks, RAID-1 (mirroring) should give you nearly double the
    > >read performance and about the same write performance, while still
    > >protecting against one of the disks failing. (In theory - never tried it
    > >in anger...) You only get one disk's worth of storage capacity, though.
    >
    > Now, how in the world could RAID 1 give ANY increase in read
    > performance, let alone "double" the rate??


    Independently queued multitasked reads have a choice of either member of a
    RAID 1 set to go to. In such a multitasked situation a single drive might
    be able to handle small record random I/O at say 200 I/Os per second. The
    RAID 1 combination will approach 400 I/Os per second.

    > If we're talking about
    > theory, the latency in the RAID controller could only SLOW BOTH read
    > and write performance.

    That's false. There is no significant latency in general for RAID and
    especially not for RAID 1.
  16. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Milleron wrote:
    > Now, how in the world could RAID 1 give ANY increase in read
    > performance, let alone "double" the rate?? If we're talking about
    > theory, the latency in the RAID controller could only SLOW BOTH read
    > and write performance.

    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.

    --

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I ticked.
  17. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Paul Taylor" <birder@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
    news:tyVNc.186$9_5.9080@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
    > Milleron wrote:
    > > Now, how in the world could RAID 1 give ANY increase in read
    > > performance, let alone "double" the rate?? If we're talking about
    > > theory, the latency in the RAID controller could only SLOW BOTH read
    > > and write performance.
    >
    > 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.

    Well, there is no major extra write overhead for RAID 1. So expect RAID 1
    writes to go about as fast as a single drive. A sequential read will go
    only about as fast as a single drive HOWEVER you could run two independent
    sequential reads simultaneously at that same single drive speed.
  18. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    Milleron wrote:
    > I don't call it "RAID 0 Insanity." I think "RAID 0 hysteria" is a
    > more apt description of this unfortunate trend, and I rather hope that
    > it will fade away.
    > However, so many of us are gadgeteers at heart that many will not be
    > able to resist that shiny new "go-faster thingy" on the MB, even if it
    > is nonsense for the vast majority of us.

    I think you're reading a lot into my suggestion, Ron. I don't use RAID 0,
    and don't intend to.

    Since John was buying two drives - which can be set up in either RAID 0
    or RAID 1 (and 0+1 on some controllers) and was asking what the best setup
    would be, it makes sense for him to try the different options and see what
    works best for him.

    --

    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I ticked.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Paul Taylor" <birder@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
    news:FIVNc.191$9_5.9163@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
    > Milleron wrote:
    > > I don't call it "RAID 0 Insanity." I think "RAID 0 hysteria" is a
    > > more apt description of this unfortunate trend, and I rather hope that
    > > it will fade away.
    > > However, so many of us are gadgeteers at heart that many will not be
    > > able to resist that shiny new "go-faster thingy" on the MB, even if it
    > > is nonsense for the vast majority of us.
    >
    > I think you're reading a lot into my suggestion, Ron. I don't use RAID 0,
    > and don't intend to.
    >
    > Since John was buying two drives - which can be set up in either RAID 0
    > or RAID 1 (and 0+1 on some controllers)

    OR even better as JBOD.
  20. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <UrYNc.146103$OB3.80449@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
    ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net (Ron Reaugh) wrote:

    >
    > "John Hollingsworth" <jwhNO-SPAM@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
    > news:memo.20040727144613.3512C@jwh.compulink.co.uk...
    > > In article <cNsNc.130$QW4.7342@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au>,
    > > birder@ozemail.com.au (Paul Taylor) wrote:
    > >
    > > > John Hollingsworth wrote:
    > > > > 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?
    > > >
    > > > If you have the latest BIOS (1006) and drivers, it should be Plug n'
    > > > Play.
    > > > There's a BIOS option to select between RAID and non-RAID mode for
    > > > one
    > > > of
    > > > the controllers (I forget if it's the Promise or VIA Southbridge.)
    > > >
    > > > Since you have two drives, why not use RAID-0 (striping) for
    > > > increased
    > > > performance, or RAID-1 (mirroring) for redundancy?
    > > >
    > > > --
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
    > > > -=-
    > > > Paul Taylor Veni, vidi, tici -
    > > > birder@ozemail.com.au I came, I saw, I
    > > > ticked.
    > > >
    > > Ah - thanks Paul. I've down loaded the manual which doesn't make that
    > > clear.
    > >
    > > I am currently churning on what to do. On my present #1PC, I have C:
    > > and
    > > D:, use C: for programs and D: for data only. I also Ghost C: to D:
    > > each
    > > week and also Ghost my Laptop C: to D: too.
    > >
    > > I would like to go for RAID-0, but have the problem of data backup
    > > unless
    > > I buy another PATA drive, say. RAID-0+1 seems to need too many drives!
    > > What would you advise?
    >
    > 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.
    >
    >
    >
    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.
  21. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <memo.20040727135655.3512B@jwh.compulink.co.uk>,
    jwhNO-SPAM@cix.co.uk (John Hollingsworth) wrote:

    > 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.
    >
    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.
  22. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "John Hollingsworth" <jwhNO-SPAM@cix.co.uk> wrote in message

    > > 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.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > 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.

    There shouldn't be regarding backup.
  23. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    In article <LDeOc.349617$Gx4.273220@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
    ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net (Ron Reaugh) wrote:

    >
    > "John Hollingsworth" <jwhNO-SPAM@cix.co.uk> wrote in message
    >
    > > > 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.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > 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.
    >
    > There shouldn't be regarding backup.
    >
    >
    >
    True - can't dispute your point:-)

    John

    Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.
  24. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 01:39:27 GMT, "Ron Reaugh"
    <ron-reaugh@worldnet.att.net> wrote:

    >
    >"Milleron" <millerdot90@SPAMlessosu.edu> wrote in message
    >news:f55gg0hsd716vn9jd1ecigs2or80d41aht@4ax.com...
    >> Do it the way you originally planned. RAID 0 will improve performance
    >> but NOT PERCEPTIBLY -- i.e., you'd have to use a disk benchmarking
    >> program to document it
    >
    >
    >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.
    >
    >> -- AND RAID 0 will double the chance of a HD
    >> failure.
    >
    >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.

    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
  25. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    "Milleron" <millerdot90@SPAMlessosu.edu> wrote in message
    news:13rlg0tupj2d8ii3gvmafvmbft9s4ancdl@4ax.com...
    > >> -- AND RAID 0 will double the chance of a HD
    > >> failure.
    > >
    > >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.
    >
    > 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??

    Not exactly which is why I posted a very precise statement on the issue.
  26. Archived from groups: alt.comp.periphs.mainboard.asus (More info?)

    On Thu, 29 Jul 2004 08:13:44 +1000, Paul Taylor
    <birder@ozemail.com.au> wrote:

    >Milleron wrote:
    >> Now, how in the world could RAID 1 give ANY increase in read
    >> performance, let alone "double" the rate?? If we're talking about
    >> theory, the latency in the RAID controller could only SLOW BOTH read
    >> and write performance.
    >
    >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.

    I stand corrected! Thanks very much for the explanation.
    Ron
Ask a new question

Read More

Asus SATA NAS / RAID Motherboards