Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

multi Raid 0 arrays

Last response: in Storage
Share
June 5, 2007 7:16:54 PM

hi,
i have a Gigabyte m55sli MB & 2 WD 250G. i want to do a raid 0 array, but can i do more than 1 array with this MB controler?

i know that with intel matrix tech it can be done, what about what i have now?

thanks,
D.

More about : multi raid arrays

a b G Storage
June 5, 2007 8:07:40 PM

You can do as many single disk arrays as there are sata connectors.
June 5, 2007 8:22:29 PM

What Is SINGELE DISK ARRAY??????? a partition? if so- it's not raid...

I Wanna do 3 Raid 0 arrays WITH BOTH DRIVES of 100G, 200G, 200G.
Related resources
a b G Storage
June 5, 2007 9:17:55 PM

A single disk array is an array consisting of [0] = 1 disks.
I did not say a RAID.
June 5, 2007 9:31:43 PM

so what's your point? you stated the obvious & it is not related to my Q- if i can do more the 1 Raid 0 array with the m55sli chipset?..........
a b G Storage
June 5, 2007 9:47:27 PM

But wouldn't you want 6 raid 0 arrays (each consisting of 1 disks) ?
Sounds like a win win win win win win to me.
June 5, 2007 9:53:35 PM

never mind man, i don't know what you meen....
& i don't think you understand what i meen.... thanks anyway...
a b G Storage
June 5, 2007 10:41:52 PM

What you want is a raid 0 array consisting of 2 raid 0 arrays?
Or 3 independent raid 0 arrays?


That mobo has only 4 sata.
Looks like the I/O chip supports 1 raid (0/1/5) but only one at a time. I did not see any mention of the ability to raid IDE devices.

So you can do a raid 0, but no nested or combined raids.
June 5, 2007 10:42:44 PM

You need to look in the manual, but in normal situations a controller will allow you to create several arrays. That means 3 raid 0 arrays of 2 disks each.
June 6, 2007 3:37:40 AM

with intel chipset with ich7r 8 & 9 there is a feature called intel matrix tech, it allows to create several arrays on 2 drives.
that meens that if i have 3hds of 250G, i can do for ex. 100G (from all of them) on raid 0 & then on the rest raid 5.
in that way i have fast C:\ with Win & Games & D:\ for the rest of the stuff.
or what i wanna do is several raid 0 arrays on the same 2 250G hds. in that way i create C:, D: & E:, for all of them using only 2 drives.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/12/19/intel_or_nvidia/...

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/03/12/cheap_raid_ravag...

in thess links, you can see an ex. picture of what i'm talking about....

can i do it on the nforce4/5 chipset?
June 7, 2007 2:25:03 AM

I think what he's asking is if he can make 2 seperate arrays of 2 disks each, not a nested array.

And to the OP, I believe you can.
June 7, 2007 3:35:44 AM

Quote:
I think what he's asking is if he can make 2 seperate arrays of 2 disks each, not a nested array.

And to the OP, I believe you can.


no man, i wanna do 2 arrays with ONLY 2 drives.
not 2XHDs Raid 0 + 2XHDs Raid 0.

2 HDs of 250G, with 2 arrays in them of raid 0 of 200G for OS & Games & 300G for the rest of the suff.

it shows in the pictures in the links... but with raid 5 & raid 0 (but i don't have 3 HDs).
June 7, 2007 1:53:26 PM

So, what you want is the following:

- 2x 250GB physical drives (500GB total space)
- RAID 0
- 1 space of 200GB for OS & Games
- 1 space of 300GB for other stuff

You do not need 2 arrays for this. You need one RAID 0 array with 2 partitions on it.

Set up a single RAID 0 array on your motherboard. You will get a single 500GB logical drive. Form 2 partitions on it, one at 200GB (C: ), and one 300GB (D: ).

Done.
June 11, 2007 7:03:53 AM

i didn't knew that i can partitionize a raid array... i tought an arrays is the "raid method" for partitions.

but as i recall, i talked to someone in this forum about RAID stuff & he said that if i do a partition on or with raid arrays than it will be very slow & cost a lot pf CPU time.

at the time i asked about doing a mix:
2X250G= 500.
200G raid 0. the rest 300G is on partitions out side the array. (150G in each drive).

(i can find it in the forum if you like...)
June 11, 2007 8:27:26 AM

I have noticed your posts for a bit now, and find that you can explain complex raid in simple terms. Not an easy thing for most folks. I'm impressed.

There's a new forum starting, xcpus.com. Please feel free to browse, and perhaps join.
June 11, 2007 10:29:51 AM

Quote:
i didn't knew that i can partitionize a raid array... i tought an arrays is the "raid method" for partitions.


No, an array of disks causes multiple drives to appear logically as one volume. You can do practically anything to that volume that you could to an individual drive that's not in an array and is also seen as one volume.

Quote:
but as i recall, i talked to someone in this forum about RAID stuff & he said that if i do a partition on or with raid arrays than it will be very slow & cost a lot pf CPU time.


Untrue,this doesn't matter and you MUST create a partition on the arrays. After you define the RAID array, it is then as if you have one empty, unpartitioned and unformatted drive.

Quote:
at the time i asked about doing a mix:
2X250G= 500.
200G raid 0. the rest 300G is on partitions out side the array. (150G in each drive).


That you cannot do. All the usable space on each drive is dedicated to the array. By that I mean, suppose you had one 250GB drive and one 320GB drive, then you can create the 500GB array but have wasted 70GB of space on the larger drive, space that cannot be used for anything so long as it is a member of the 500GB array.

This is the normal limitation of RAID, but I'm not familiar with all the tricks Intel has come up with, I was under the impression such a thing can be done with a Matrix array but frankly I would be hesitant to use unconventional features that relied on a certain chipset because the odds of failure are already increased running RAID0, but if you then add odds of failure of the motherboard in preventing access to the data, it becomes a more and more risky proposition unless you're spending a heck of a lot of time making more frequent backups.

I hope you also realize that beyond synthetic benchmarks, in real world uses RAID0 often isn't much faster than a single drive, and can be slower than using two independent drives concurrently for some tasks. example
June 14, 2007 5:33:36 AM

the use of the pc's is for gaming.
do you think it's better to put the os on one drive & games on the other than do RAID 0?
!