Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Raid array

Last response: in Windows XP
Share
March 2, 2005 4:05:21 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Is there any problems to running a raid using external
hard drives? can win xp pro run a raid or would i have to
get 3rd party software?

More about : raid array

Anonymous
March 2, 2005 4:11:21 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

If you have an external raid array it is probably SCSI and you should use a
bus mastering SCSI controller that supports RAID. If it's not SCSI you
should rethink using RAID.

Kerry Brown
KDB Systems

"Joe" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:238f01c51f6b$8bd4fbc0$a501280a@phx.gbl...
> Is there any problems to running a raid using external
> hard drives? can win xp pro run a raid or would i have to
> get 3rd party software?
Anonymous
March 2, 2005 7:11:38 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Hello

Do some research on Raid before going down that road, that
would better help you, research it

Al

Joe wrote:

> Is there any problems to running a raid using external
> hard drives? can win xp pro run a raid or would i have to
> get 3rd party software?
Related resources
March 3, 2005 10:30:12 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

To run Raid 1, it is best to have dual processors,
it does slow down your computer.
You need SCSI or SATA card with Raid capability.
I believe the new Intel motherboards can
be configured to run SATA Raid.

Raid 1 is good for companies that have very important
data that have to be mirrored every minute. If one drive
fails, then you can boot from the other. (accounting small
firm is good example)
Otherwise using drive backup (mirroring) software that backup once
a day, is cheaper and better way to go.

There is Raid, 1, 2, 3 etc. each is different, anything above
Raid 1 is for enterprise and large servers use.

"Joe" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:238f01c51f6b$8bd4fbc0$a501280a@phx.gbl...
> Is there any problems to running a raid using external
> hard drives? can win xp pro run a raid or would i have to
> get 3rd party software?
Anonymous
March 3, 2005 1:20:39 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

<Otherwise using drive backup (mirroring) software that
backup once a day, is cheaper and better way to go..>

Any recomendations (products)on this set up?
March 3, 2005 6:51:54 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

I use Casper XP
http://www.fssdev.com
Be sure to set the secondary drive partition to Active
(Bootable).
After the first backup, remove primary drive, set
slave to primary, see if it boots up OK.
I use a task scheduler to run Casper once a day.
C:\Program Files\Future Systems Solutions\Casper XP\CasperXP.EXE /COPY C: D:
/Y


<anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:407b01c5201d$b43c2c70$a401280a@phx.gbl...
> <Otherwise using drive backup (mirroring) software that
> backup once a day, is cheaper and better way to go..>
>
> Any recomendations (products)on this set up?
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 1:36:18 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:30:12 -0800, Ted wrote:
>
> To run Raid 1, it is best to have dual processors,
> it does slow down your computer.
> You need SCSI or SATA card with Raid capability.
> I believe the new Intel motherboards can
> be configured to run SATA Raid.

There are inexpensive add-in SATA and IDE solutions from Promise. I use
the Promise SX6000 with 6 x 250GB IDE drives on many small servers.

RAID 1 works fine with those small controller cards with a SINGLE CPU,
even using software RAID 1 it does not consume much in the way of cpu
cycles - look at perfmon some time if you don't believe me.

I would only run RAID (any type) on external drives if it was SCSI based,
in a single chassis and the entire thing was on a quality UPS.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 4, 2005 1:36:19 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

> RAID 1 works fine with those small controller cards with a SINGLE CPU,
> even using software RAID 1 it does not consume much in the way of cpu
> cycles - look at perfmon some time if you don't believe me.

It does have spikes of high memory usage when data
is changed.
Hard to catch, but you can notice it in a busy server
in a small network.
3.0 CPU with 1 GB memory and two SCSI 7200 RPM hard drives.




"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.03.22.39.18.715577@nowhere.lan...
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 07:30:12 -0800, Ted wrote:
>>
>> To run Raid 1, it is best to have dual processors,
>> it does slow down your computer.
>> You need SCSI or SATA card with Raid capability.
>> I believe the new Intel motherboards can
>> be configured to run SATA Raid.
>
> There are inexpensive add-in SATA and IDE solutions from Promise. I use
> the Promise SX6000 with 6 x 250GB IDE drives on many small servers.
>
> RAID 1 works fine with those small controller cards with a SINGLE CPU,
> even using software RAID 1 it does not consume much in the way of cpu
> cycles - look at perfmon some time if you don't believe me.
>
> I would only run RAID (any type) on external drives if it was SCSI based,
> in a single chassis and the entire thing was on a quality UPS.
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 1:37:06 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 10:20:39 -0800, anonymous wrote:

> <Otherwise using drive backup (mirroring) software that
> backup once a day, is cheaper and better way to go..>
>
> Any recomendations (products)on this set up?

RAID does not change the need for backups - RAID 1/5 is for drive fault
tolerance and performance. Backups are for saving data, never confuse the
two.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 3:09:02 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:58:42 -0800, Ted wrote:

>> RAID 1 works fine with those small controller cards with a SINGLE CPU,
>> even using software RAID 1 it does not consume much in the way of cpu
>> cycles - look at perfmon some time if you don't believe me.
>
> It does have spikes of high memory usage when data
> is changed.
> Hard to catch, but you can notice it in a busy server
> in a small network.
> 3.0 CPU with 1 GB memory and two SCSI 7200 RPM hard drives.

I run RAID-1 for all OS partitions on all servers. With SCSI, SATA, IDE,
controller or soft RAID-1, I don't see more than a few K and I can't
attribute that to the mirror.

Single CPU, Xeon, 2GB, RAID-1 c=20GB, D=230GB, 75 users

What do you consider HIGH memory?

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 4, 2005 3:09:03 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

>Single CPU, Xeon

Xeon are made for server boards.
All Intel Xeon compatible server boards have dual processors.
Plus its much faster than a non-server CPU.


"Leythos" <void@nowhere.lan> wrote in message
news:p an.2005.03.04.00.13.29.451907@nowhere.lan...
> On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 15:58:42 -0800, Ted wrote:
>
>>> RAID 1 works fine with those small controller cards with a SINGLE CPU,
>>> even using software RAID 1 it does not consume much in the way of cpu
>>> cycles - look at perfmon some time if you don't believe me.
>>
>> It does have spikes of high memory usage when data
>> is changed.
>> Hard to catch, but you can notice it in a busy server
>> in a small network.
>> 3.0 CPU with 1 GB memory and two SCSI 7200 RPM hard drives.
>
> I run RAID-1 for all OS partitions on all servers. With SCSI, SATA, IDE,
> controller or soft RAID-1, I don't see more than a few K and I can't
> attribute that to the mirror.
>
> Single CPU, Xeon, 2GB, RAID-1 c=20GB, D=230GB, 75 users
>
> What do you consider HIGH memory?
>
> --
> spam999free@rrohio.com
> remove 999 in order to email me
>
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 6:49:29 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 19:42:15 -0800, Ted wrote:
>
> Xeon are made for server boards.
> All Intel Xeon compatible server boards have dual processors.
> Plus its much faster than a non-server CPU.

Um, the Xeon boards are NOT all Dual CPU boards. There are other vendors
than Intel that make single and Dual Xeon boards.

I'll still stick with my RAID-1 not loading memory or the CPU to any
significant amount based on workstation and server setups we done with
controller or soft based RAID.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
March 4, 2005 6:49:30 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

Would like to get your thoughts on this product...

http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=70494...

I would be running this on a PC, not a server. I am
looking for backup with some parity. I have files that I
can't loose, but don't have the time to burn them onto
DVDs all the time.
March 4, 2005 7:14:08 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

>RAID does not change the need for backups - RAID 1/5 is
for drive fault
>tolerance and performance. Backups are for saving data,
never confuse the
>two.


I am not planning on working off of the raid drives. I
will still be working off my internal hard drives, but I
would be using the raid drives as a back up to my working
drives. the raid is in case one of those drives fail. it
is not a permanent solution i am looking for, just
something to get me through the next 12 months or so.
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 10:13:18 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

> Would like to get your thoughts on this product...
>
> http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=70494...
>
> I would be running this on a PC, not a server. I am
> looking for backup with some parity. I have files that I
> can't loose, but don't have the time to burn them onto
> DVDs all the time.

Joe

This looks like a reasonable product. From you previous posts it sounds like
you want something that will mirror your internal drive. You could set this
up via a software mirror between your internal drive and a volume on the
external RAID. You may find too much of a performance penalty because the
external drive enclosure uses Firewire or USB 2.0. You may have to use a
disk cloning package like Norton Ghost and image your drive at the end of
the day, or schedule it for a time when you are not using the PC. A better
solution would be a internal SCSI drive mirrored to an external SCSI drive.
I've never actually tried setting up a software mirror to a external
Firewire or USB drive so I would be interested to hear how it works if you
try it. As mentioned in other posts RAID gives you fault tolerance but is
not a backup solution. What happens in the event of a fire, flood, theft,
file system corruption from a virus, or just accidentally deleting the wrong
files?

Kerry Brown
KDB Systems
March 4, 2005 11:05:33 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

>This looks like a reasonable product. From you previous
posts it sounds like
>you want something that will mirror your internal drive.
You could set this
>up via a software mirror between your internal drive and
a volume on the
>external RAID. You may find too much of a performance
penalty because the
>external drive enclosure uses Firewire or USB 2.0. You
may have to use a
>disk cloning package like Norton Ghost and image your
drive at the end of
>the day, or schedule it for a time when you are not
using the PC. A better
>solution would be a internal SCSI drive mirrored to an
external SCSI drive.
>I've never actually tried setting up a software mirror
to a external
>Firewire or USB drive so I would be interested to hear
how it works if you
>try it. As mentioned in other posts RAID gives you fault
tolerance but is
>not a backup solution. What happens in the event of a
fire, flood, theft,
>file system corruption from a virus, or just
accidentally deleting the wrong
>files?
>
>Kerry Brown
>KDB Systems
>
>
You are close. The drives would be used to back up files.
I have 3 internal hard drives. 1 for OS and applications,
2 for data storage (mostly video/images/DVD authoring). I
need a way to back up the files to another drive in case
my internal drives go down. I work within a hospital but
don't have enough network drive space to back them up.
The hospital wants 7,000 dollars for 500gb of additional
server space from our department. I think that is a too
much money considering I can buy 2TB for half that. I was
going to just buy a 1TB external hard drive to archive
the files to, but thought this would be a more secure
solution. I am not going to work off of the drives. I am
just going to copy files to them. I thought that if one
of these drives should break I can get another one and
have the others rebuild it (the reason for the Raid). I
usually sit down once a year and back up everything to
DVDs but it takes a lot of disks and DVD burning is still
pretty slow. I am not really concerned about the speed of
the drives. They do however make a SCSI version for about
400 dollars more, which I could get.
Anonymous
March 4, 2005 11:25:00 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

> You are close. The drives would be used to back up files.
> I have 3 internal hard drives. 1 for OS and applications,
> 2 for data storage (mostly video/images/DVD authoring). I
> need a way to back up the files to another drive in case
> my internal drives go down. I work within a hospital but
> don't have enough network drive space to back them up.
> The hospital wants 7,000 dollars for 500gb of additional
> server space from our department. I think that is a too
> much money considering I can buy 2TB for half that. I was
> going to just buy a 1TB external hard drive to archive
> the files to, but thought this would be a more secure
> solution. I am not going to work off of the drives. I am
> just going to copy files to them. I thought that if one
> of these drives should break I can get another one and
> have the others rebuild it (the reason for the Raid). I
> usually sit down once a year and back up everything to
> DVDs but it takes a lot of disks and DVD burning is still
> pretty slow. I am not really concerned about the speed of
> the drives. They do however make a SCSI version for about
> 400 dollars more, which I could get.

Depending on your system software mirroring to USB/Firewire may cause your
whole system to slow down during drive access. Normally mirroring causes
slightly slower writes and faster reads. Using Firewire/USB I think reads
and writes would both be slower because of the overhead of USB/Firewire. For
backup or imaging you would have to give up the time to create the image and
your second set of data will only be as current as the image but there will
be no slowdown for normal read/write operations. Technology is evolving so
fast there it's hard to keep up and know what works in the real world. I'm
going on theory alone. Let us know what you try and how it works.

Kerry Brown
KDB Systems
March 4, 2005 12:31:21 PM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

One method of backup is not enough.
1) You need a software that backup your important data
to multiple devices at different intervals.
http://www.backtec.com/minman.htm
Is a good one.
2) Back to DVD and take it home daily in case of theft
or fire.
3) Backing up your hard drive is a good extra power to you.

MinuteMan Data Backup is very useful to backup your important data,
such as your Favorites, Email, Notes, customer information,
your personal documents, pictures, etc.
It would have been a catastrophe for me without it, because
somewhere along the line a drive would take a dive, data gets lost,
or get infected with a virus.
I do rotary backups of the same backups to network computer,
local drive, CD-R/DVD-R, and external USB drives.
Using a drive image software for if my drive froze is great
but can't rely on it 100%. Actually it could fail you on the day
you need it. Because it has failed making a mirror, because
you are having problems with the current drive.

An addition of Raid 1 (requires two hard drives) is more power
to you, for if the master drive took a dive, then you can boot from
the second drive instantly.
But remember to separate your important data from your operating
system and what software is installed in it, because all that can be
re-installed.

If you do mirror to an external drive:
Use a USB drive kit with a drive of your choice that has
been partitioned and set as bootable.
Mirror to it, take it out of the drive kit enclosure, install it
in the computer, and see if it boots up.
Not all mirroring software can guarantee to make an external
drive bootable.






"Joe" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:468101c520d3$ff1483d0$a401280a@phx.gbl...
>
>>This looks like a reasonable product. From you previous
> posts it sounds like
>>you want something that will mirror your internal drive.
> You could set this
>>up via a software mirror between your internal drive and
> a volume on the
>>external RAID. You may find too much of a performance
> penalty because the
>>external drive enclosure uses Firewire or USB 2.0. You
> may have to use a
>>disk cloning package like Norton Ghost and image your
> drive at the end of
>>the day, or schedule it for a time when you are not
> using the PC. A better
>>solution would be a internal SCSI drive mirrored to an
> external SCSI drive.
>>I've never actually tried setting up a software mirror
> to a external
>>Firewire or USB drive so I would be interested to hear
> how it works if you
>>try it. As mentioned in other posts RAID gives you fault
> tolerance but is
>>not a backup solution. What happens in the event of a
> fire, flood, theft,
>>file system corruption from a virus, or just
> accidentally deleting the wrong
>>files?
>>
>>Kerry Brown
>>KDB Systems
>>
>>
> You are close. The drives would be used to back up files.
> I have 3 internal hard drives. 1 for OS and applications,
> 2 for data storage (mostly video/images/DVD authoring). I
> need a way to back up the files to another drive in case
> my internal drives go down. I work within a hospital but
> don't have enough network drive space to back them up.
> The hospital wants 7,000 dollars for 500gb of additional
> server space from our department. I think that is a too
> much money considering I can buy 2TB for half that. I was
> going to just buy a 1TB external hard drive to archive
> the files to, but thought this would be a more secure
> solution. I am not going to work off of the drives. I am
> just going to copy files to them. I thought that if one
> of these drives should break I can get another one and
> have the others rebuild it (the reason for the Raid). I
> usually sit down once a year and back up everything to
> DVDs but it takes a lot of disks and DVD burning is still
> pretty slow. I am not really concerned about the speed of
> the drives. They do however make a SCSI version for about
> 400 dollars more, which I could get.
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 1:06:21 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 03:20:44 -0800, Joe wrote:

>
> Would like to get your thoughts on this product...
>
> http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=70494...
>
> I would be running this on a PC, not a server. I am
> looking for backup with some parity. I have files that I
> can't loose, but don't have the time to burn them onto
> DVDs all the time.

Since it's FireWire I personally would never install it on any computer
for a client.

If you just want a large RAID array, why does it have to be external. You
can easily purchase a nice server type case - Chenbro - with room for 12
drives and dual 550W PSU's and then run whatever motherboard you want.

This is an IDE based ATA100 RAID controller that has it's own CPU and
Memory - it handles 6 x IDE drives and screams. I've built a lot of 1.3TB
servers around this card.
http://www.cdw.com/shop/products/default.aspx?EDC=34986...

If you really want to get the Firewire unit, get the same unit in SCSI and
then get a good Adaptec SCSI card.

One thing to mention - RAID IS NOT A BACKUP METHOD, it's a fault tolerance
method. If you just want a backup method, get a tape drive and tapes.


--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
Anonymous
March 5, 2005 1:07:52 AM

Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware (More info?)

On Fri, 04 Mar 2005 04:14:08 -0800, Joe wrote:
>
>>RAID does not change the need for backups - RAID 1/5 is
>>for drive fault tolerance and performance. Backups are for saving
>>data, never confuse the two.
>
>
> I am not planning on working off of the raid drives. I will still be
> working off my internal hard drives, but I would be using the raid
> drives as a back up to my working drives. the raid is in case one of
> those drives fail. it is not a permanent solution i am looking for, just
> something to get me through the next 12 months or so.

Buy a good quality tape drive.

--
spam999free@rrohio.com
remove 999 in order to email me
!