Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

SATA Drives, non RAID

Last response: in Motherboards
Share
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 27, 2004 5:56:00 PM

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.

More about : sata drives raid

Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 3:30:21 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 3:30:22 AM

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.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 4:15:34 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 4:15:35 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 4:15:35 AM

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
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 5:06:07 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 28, 2004 5:06:08 AM

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.
July 29, 2004 12:58:13 AM

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
July 29, 2004 1:01:38 AM

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
July 29, 2004 1:08:45 AM

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
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 5:31:32 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 5:33:13 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 5:34:55 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 5:39:27 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 5:43:33 AM

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

"Milleron" <millerdot90@SPAMlessosu.edu> wrote in message
news:p d5gg051aabaq3tqa8tjbajg3ot2q2oe4u@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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 12:13:44 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 12:13:45 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 12:24:36 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 12:24:37 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 2:58:00 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 29, 2004 2:58:00 PM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2004 2:12:59 AM

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.
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 30, 2004 1:24:00 PM

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.
July 31, 2004 4:41:21 AM

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
Anonymous
a b V Motherboard
July 31, 2004 6:06:04 AM

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.
July 31, 2004 6:41:55 PM

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
!