RAID 0 Partition

Hi,
I read the RAID FAQ but I am a little confused if I understood it correctly.

I plan to follow suit to the Toms Hardware computer build and run 2 of the 750 GB WD Caviar drives in parallel, RAID 0.

I am building a computer basically from scratch and installing windows Vista.
Relevant info:
Stiker Extreme MB
Vista
2 of the Caviar 750 GB Hard Drives.

What I want to do is install the OS, from scratch, to a 150 GB partition, then partition the remaining 600 GB into 300 GB and 300 GB. I like doing this because if I want to format or erase 1 logical drive I don't lose the rest, preference really.

I have also never ran a RAID array before.

From what I read:
1. Plug in the drives to the raid array
2. Boot up computer and enter Raid BIOS.
3. Select stripe size (what is it? 2? I will have 2 drives in RAID 0 so is stripe size 2? What should it be? Mostly 90% gaming and some 10% business/webdesign use)
4. Reboot from Vista CD?
5. Says install RAID drivers from Floppy, but the motherboard comes with a driver CD, I think, haven't got it yet. How do I install the drivers from CD or does it matter?
6. Reboot?
7. I have a bootable floppy with fdisk and stuff on it, do I set up my partitions at this point? Do I have to partition each drive identically or at this point are both drives being treated as 1 drive and partitioning does it to both exactly? It's an old 98 boot disk though, is there a better way to partition this? I want to use NTSF?
8. Reboot?
9. Install Vista normally.

I am taking my computer to family 850 miles away from home and want to build my computer while I am up there.
So I really want to know what I am doing beforehand.

Thank you for clearing this up for me.

-JP
12 answers Last reply
More about raid partition
  1. Oh 1 other thing.
    I will be running 32 bit Vista, will I have any problems addresing this much hard drive space?

    I know way back there was a limit on the size of hard drives that windows would see, is this pretty much gone for all practical purposes?
  2. First of all your drives wont be 750 so you cant do 150 300/300. The rest I am unsure I havent ste up a raid yet. I plan to in the near future.

    I have a 500g and it is actually only 465.
  3. raid first, then it will be treated as one drive... just change mobo settings to boot from cd.... vista cd can make the partitions before installing vista
  4. Cool.
  5. Testing.
  6. imrul said:
    raid first, then it will be treated as one drive... just change mobo settings to boot from cd.... vista cd can make the partitions before installing vista


    Thanks, I didn't know it would allow you to do that.

    Was the sequence I typed in correct?
  7. seems ok
  8. Are you really sure you want to do RAID??

    It's quite dangerous unless you really know what you are doing.

    #1) RAID - 0 would result in 1500GB, not 750GB. It would be designed for high performance with a good chance of complete system loss.
  9. Quote:
    #1) RAID - 0 would result in 1500GB, not 750GB. It would be designed for high performance with a good chance of complete system loss.


    What?
  10. baddad said:
    Quote:
    #1) RAID - 0 would result in 1500GB, not 750GB. It would be designed for high performance with a good chance of complete system loss.


    What?


    OK, Let me explain for the many readers who don't understand RAID.

    RAID-0 will use two drives to appear as a single drive.
    The effective disk space available will be twice the size of the smallest drive.

    Each file will be split between both drives, which can improve certain functions by a fair amount.
    However, the failure of any one drive will result in complete data loss.

    Based upon Google HDD studies, there is approximately a 14% chance of total data loss in year 1.
    The chance of total dataloss increases to 30% by the end of the second year.

    This only includes HDD failure and not many software or human errors.

    For more details, Wikipedia would be a good place to start.
  11. Maybe you should have said 1.5TB's.
  12. yea... raid 0 is kinda dangerous.... but raid 5 is a lot less dangerous and gains almost as much perfromance
Ask a new question

Read More

Hard Drives NAS / RAID Partition Computer Storage