Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

RAID 0 Reliability

Last response: in Storage
Share
February 20, 2008 4:10:32 AM

I plan to use RAID 0 on 2 WDC 1600AAJS 160Gb HDD and would like to hear an advise or two about RAID 0 reliability configuration. Does RAID 0 often cause trouble and corrupt files?

I have Gigabyte GA-965P-S3 mainboard that has 4 SATA connector controlled by ICH8 and another 2 GSATA connector controlled by Gigabyte SATA2. Should I plug the HDDs connector to ICH8 or GSATA if I plan to make RAID 0 with my 2 HDDs?

Any information will be appreciated.

More about : raid reliability

February 20, 2008 6:30:16 AM

RAID 0 will not just corrupt files. Setting up RAID shouldn't cause too much trouble - just RTFM and remember google is your friend. Some people will say that you don't get too much improvement on RAID 0, others will disagree. Both sides will throw links at the other side supporting their arguments. One thing that they all agree on is that if you loose one drive you've lost everything, that's is no different to only having a single HDD.

You can experience problems if you try to move your disks to a different RAID controller. The thing to remember is that your data is only as good as your last backup irrespective of how your disks are configured.

UD.
February 20, 2008 7:10:34 AM

UncleDave said:
RAID 0 will not just corrupt files. Setting up RAID shouldn't cause too much trouble - just RTFM and remember google is your friend. Some people will say that you don't get too much improvement on RAID 0, others will disagree. Both sides will throw links at the other side supporting their arguments. One thing that they all agree on is that if you loose one drive you've lost everything, that's is no different to only having a single HDD.

You can experience problems if you try to move your disks to a different RAID controller. The thing to remember is that your data is only as good as your last backup irrespective of how your disks are configured.

UD.


The only area you'll see a difference in gaming is level load time, thats it. This link will tell all.

Western Digital's Raptors in RAID-0: Are two drives better than one?
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2101&p=1
Related resources
February 20, 2008 8:20:47 AM

well. for one those are raptors, AND they're in RAID-O. It's like trying to find out whether fueling a 1000 hp Supra with Premium/ULtra/Sport/Super gasoline will improve acceleration.

Seriously. How many of us have two Raptors lying around? I'll consider those test results when they test a couple of mundane drives, like WD AAKS series for example. Those guys at Anandtech have really lost their grip on reality. (don't get me started on them testing mid-range video cards in systems powered by 1000 dollar quad-cores.)
February 21, 2008 3:18:13 AM

I know RAID 0 configuration will faster read time but what I most concern and don't know is about its reliability. Does the configuration of RAID 0 often damages files or such?
February 21, 2008 3:36:25 AM

liswara said:
I know RAID 0 configuration will faster read time but what I most concern and don't know is about its reliability. Does the configuration of RAID 0 often damages files or such?


The real problem is if you ever change RAID controllers (change motherboards) sometimes you can mess things up good. Plus you increase the risk factor of loosing everything for just a tiny performance difference. Going from a average HDD to a faster model (Raptor or a Samsung Spinpoint F1) you will notice more performance, the performance difference between RAID is smaller than getting a faster HDD.
February 21, 2008 5:08:50 AM

Raid 0 has three reliability factors:

1) The Operating System
2) The Controller
3) The Drives

Windows OS'es fall apart over time, they get slow and bloated from just working, files change every time you boot up and shut down. If you add and remove things, often it's worse.

Some onboard raid controllers are better than others, and the software drivers do cause problems.

When a HD fails the raid builds dies with it.

I am typing this from my current raid 0 build on a Promise FastTrack 378 controller using 2 37BG raptors on an NForce 3 motherboard with a skt 939 athlon 2x 4800 cpu.

Every month I chkdsk and defrag, clean the registry and delete unused junk from the array. My array is now 19 months old and I had to do one repair install on it(win xp pro sp2). It is starting to slow down though, so I will have to do a clean format and install soon.
I also have a full image of the array from when I built it, and I keep all the non program stuff on another drive.

Raid 0 reads and writes faster than one HD alone. Data not secure
Raid 1 reads fast, writes slower than one HD alone. Data as secure as the HD.
Other raid configurations have other advantages.
If I keep this box much longer, I might just get a 7200.11 32BM cache hd and farm out the raptors.




Rattus Viola: Sino non they quisnam operor non have scientia futurus vestri rector.
February 21, 2008 5:40:04 AM

If you have an Intel board you can do Intel Matrix Raid. This allows you to have both raid0 & raid1 on just 2 drives. Check it out!!
February 21, 2008 7:29:59 AM

bobbknight said:


Every month I chkdsk and defrag, clean the registry and delete unused junk from the array.



If you don't mind how do you run chkdsk and how do you clean the registry. Thanks Systemlord :sol: 
February 22, 2008 4:34:07 AM

So I guess RAID 0 configuration cause more trouble than advantages then?
February 22, 2008 4:42:45 AM

If you loose 1 harddrive, you cant recover your data, and for the price diffrence you pay for a mobo to have raid 0 and support all the new goodies is just ridiculous. If i were you id just save my money, buy 2 harddrives, and runem normally. Coming from a person who has lost a harddrive in raid 0, lemme tell ya, the performance diffrence vs having to load a new os and all the trimmins, its not worth it.
February 22, 2008 4:51:51 AM

I have had my 2 WD drives in Raid 0 for three years now and have had no problems. I recommend (because its what I'm going to do) if you want Raid 0 just to have a third drive as a back-up for important files.
February 22, 2008 5:08:02 AM

If your going to get a 3rd drive why not go with a raid 5 setup, i think thats the name for it, basiclly 2 hardrives in a raid 0 configuration, with a 3rd harddrive being used for backup by the bios, but in reality id save myself the worry, and just use the drives as normal drives, your performance gains almost cant be noticed these days anymore with the newer sata harddrives out there.
February 22, 2008 6:42:13 AM

I have had RAID 0 running for almost three years, only problems I had with it was due to memory problems causing corruption but also with large downloads etc. I have changed my memory and have never looked back.
February 22, 2008 7:48:21 AM

UncleDave said:
Some people will say that you don't get too much improvement on RAID 0, others will disagree. Both sides will throw links at the other side supporting their arguments.



Told you so :lol: 
!