Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Help with Raid 5 or 10

Last response: in Storage
Share
December 2, 2007 11:51:46 PM

I have been building a custom PC the last couple of weeks with the help of these forums. After some discussion it was suggested to me that I scrap what I was doing and build a Raid 5 system. So everything is on the way from Newegg and now I have some additional questions. I have ordered 3 Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD7500AAKS 750GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drives for my system, and I have a PK5 deluxe Asus mb. I have been doing some additional reading, and it everywhere I look it seems to say that RAID 10 is the better way to go. I am running a powerful PC not for gaming, but multitasking and running a SQL database. My questions are:

  • Should I buy the extra drive and run Raid 10 instead?


  • The mb says that it supports Raid 10 on the southbridge, but when I look up additional information in the user manual, it only talks about Raid 0 & 1 http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?modelmenu=2&model=1646&l1=3&l2=11&l3=534&l4=0. I am a total newb at this so I don't really understand how to do this. Do I need a Raid controller card which ever way I go? Or is this something that can be done through my mb?


  • Any help and direction will be greatly appreciated!
  • More about : raid

    December 3, 2007 12:57:45 AM

    In a raid 1+0 setup it would go something like this:

    Drive 1 - (Raid 0) - Drive 2
    | |
    (Raid 1) (Raid 1)
    | |
    Drive 3 - (Raid 0) - Drive 4

    You'd need at least 4 drives, the first Raid 0 (Drive 1+2) would be the only one visible and usable on the OS. So with 4 750GB drives, you'd only be able to use 1.5TB of space, the second Raid 0 (Drive 3+4) would be a constant mirror of the contents of the other Array. So for example if Drive 2 failed, Drive 4 would take the place of Drive 2. That's also the case with Drive 1 and 3. A failure of both 1 and 3 would render the data in the remaining 2 and 4 completely useless, and vice-versa.

    A raid 10 setup does have its performance advantages, but the problem is the cost of the hard drives. Since both performance and reliability seem to be your need then I think that Raid 1+0 could be for you.

    Raid 1+0 is supported in your board, it's just because Raid 1+0 is not an "official" Raid type.

    I don't know anything about setting up a Raid 1+0 setup since never really had the money to do it, I think other people might have a clue. I think your board should have either a utility in the BIOS or you'd need to press something like Ctrl+A (Ati Xpress200M boards) to get into the Raid menu before booting into an OS.
    December 4, 2007 10:21:49 PM

    Wow...where's the love?? I could really use some help here...have my new Build laying in pieces waiting for help here.
    Related resources
    December 5, 2007 1:09:17 AM

    AnUnQuietMind said:
    I have been building a custom PC the last couple of weeks with the help of these forums. After some discussion it was suggested to me that I scrap what I was doing and build a Raid 5 system. So everything is on the way from Newegg and now I have some additional questions. I have ordered 3 Western Digital Caviar SE16 WD7500AAKS 750GB 7200 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drives for my system, and I have a PK5 deluxe Asus mb. I have been doing some additional reading, and it everywhere I look it seems to say that RAID 10 is the better way to go. I am running a powerful PC not for gaming, but multitasking and running a SQL database. My questions are:

  • Should I buy the extra drive and run Raid 10 instead?


  • The mb says that it supports Raid 10 on the southbridge, but when I look up additional information in the user manual, it only talks about Raid 0 & 1 http://usa.asus.com/products.aspx?modelmenu=2&model=1646&l1=3&l2=11&l3=534&l4=0. I am a total newb at this so I don't really understand how to do this. Do I need a Raid controller card which ever way I go? Or is this something that can be done through my mb?


  • Any help and direction will be greatly appreciated!


  • Tell us more about the planned SQL server implementation. What kind of databases are we running here, and what kind of transaction load is it going to have? (i.e. number of simultaneous users). What size are these databases?
    December 5, 2007 8:21:15 PM

    It is actually a pretty straight foward DB. The system is a poker machine, running pokertracker, which will constantly be datamining different sites, not sure if it will be one DB, or different DB's for different sites...but probably one DB though, and I am the only user.

    I just purchased a 4th WD 750GB Sata drive to bring the total to 4 drives (all the same) and I did pick up a 3ware 9650SE-4LPML PCI Express Lanes: 4 SATA II Controller Card.

    Everything I have read says that I should do RAID 10 so that is why I picked up the extra drive. Either direction I go, I will use the 4 drives anyway.
    December 5, 2007 8:27:31 PM

    With a low user load, probably low transaction load, and databases that aren't very big, I would say you're in the territory where it doesn't really matter.

    The 3Ware card will do RAID 5 just as well as it will do RAID 10. (I have that same card and it's very good).

    Since you bought the 4th drive, I'd go ahead and set up RAID 10. This RAID should be a data drive only, your boot drive should be on a 5th drive.

    For extreme SQL server implementations, I have seen some where you establish 2 RAIDs, and put the database files on one and the transaction logs on the other. I don't think you need to go to that step.
    !