*Build Info at Bottom*
What Raid configuration do you suggest?
Is the Intel x79 w/ RST considered a "hardware" or "software" raid, and is there a recommended number of drives to use for a Raid array on the Sata-II ports?
And if there is, which is worse: either having all 4xHD's on the Intel on-board raid controller OR not having disk failure protection in your storage array?
I'm open, but my options are either:
(a) Raid 0: lose 0% capacity, (2) 2xHD/raid array, fail 0 HD per array
(b) Raid 1: lose 50% capacity, (2) 2xHD/raid array, fail 1 HD per array (no performance hit)
(c) Raid 5: lose 33% capacity, 4xHD/raid array, fail any 1 HD (performance hit until rebuild)
(d) Raid 10: lose 50% capacity, 4xHD/raid array, fail any 2 HD (no performance hit)
For this build, affordable storage space capacity is a priority because I think I can use an external backup/security solution (eSata-III or USB-3.0) should I lose an entire Raid array and need to recover quickly.
Between the Intel, Marvell, and ASMedia a fourth SATA controller card and drivers to manage is not preferred. I'm hoping for a way to avoid that. According to Intel they support two separate raid configurations using their on-board raid controller. But i'm wondering if that's necessary or if it's better to just build a 4xHD Raid? Why am I doing this? Because I don't want to go with any mechanical drives larger than 1TB and I have not researched the whole UEFI-MBR or UEFI-GPT yet based on the Linux dual boot option. Plus I like SSD's now anyway for my money. I'm also looking to minimize the drive mappings for what it's worth, makes my work a lot easier when I do.
Option (a) keeps the full storage capacity available, which is good. But not ideal because I still have multiple drive letters and multiple Raid arrays to manage and absolutely no HD failure security. But with the two separate array's i'm minimizing the risk somewhat in that a single HD failure only kills half of my storage data.
Option (b) is secure and I could fail 2xHD's (but not from the same array) and still see no performance hit, that's good. But I lose half my capacity and it still forces me to accept multiple drive letters and multiple Raid arrays to manage.
Option (c) keeps me with a single drive letter and Raid array to manage plus give me some security in that I can fail 1xHD which is good. I lose one third of my storage capacity, and I will see a performance hit while I rebuild a failed drive. Also, like you said 4xHD's on a singe on board raid controller seems a task better suited for a dedicated Raid controller card.
Option (d) is the most secure because the data can survive failing 2xHD's and still see no performance hit, plus I only have one drive letter and Raid array to manage so that's great. But I lose half of my storage capacity, and again this leaves me with 4xHD's on a single on board Raid controller.
I think i'm leaning toward (a) or (d) right now, but (c) is still a viable option of compromise.
Thanks for all your help!
Build Info:
CPU: Intel Core i7-3930K 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 CPU Cooler
Motherboard: Asus P9X79 PRO ATX LGA2011 Motherboard
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LP 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory
Storage: Samsung 830 Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Samsung 830 Series 512GB 2.5" Solid State Disk
Video Card: PNY Quadro 4000 2GB Video Card
Case: Antec P280 ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: Kingwin Lazer Platinum 1000W 80 PLUS Platinum Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply
Optical Drive: Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Blu-Ray Reader, DVD/CD Writer
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Full (32/64-bit)
What Raid configuration do you suggest?
Is the Intel x79 w/ RST considered a "hardware" or "software" raid, and is there a recommended number of drives to use for a Raid array on the Sata-II ports?
And if there is, which is worse: either having all 4xHD's on the Intel on-board raid controller OR not having disk failure protection in your storage array?
I'm open, but my options are either:
(a) Raid 0: lose 0% capacity, (2) 2xHD/raid array, fail 0 HD per array
(b) Raid 1: lose 50% capacity, (2) 2xHD/raid array, fail 1 HD per array (no performance hit)
(c) Raid 5: lose 33% capacity, 4xHD/raid array, fail any 1 HD (performance hit until rebuild)
(d) Raid 10: lose 50% capacity, 4xHD/raid array, fail any 2 HD (no performance hit)
For this build, affordable storage space capacity is a priority because I think I can use an external backup/security solution (eSata-III or USB-3.0) should I lose an entire Raid array and need to recover quickly.
Between the Intel, Marvell, and ASMedia a fourth SATA controller card and drivers to manage is not preferred. I'm hoping for a way to avoid that. According to Intel they support two separate raid configurations using their on-board raid controller. But i'm wondering if that's necessary or if it's better to just build a 4xHD Raid? Why am I doing this? Because I don't want to go with any mechanical drives larger than 1TB and I have not researched the whole UEFI-MBR or UEFI-GPT yet based on the Linux dual boot option. Plus I like SSD's now anyway for my money. I'm also looking to minimize the drive mappings for what it's worth, makes my work a lot easier when I do.
Option (a) keeps the full storage capacity available, which is good. But not ideal because I still have multiple drive letters and multiple Raid arrays to manage and absolutely no HD failure security. But with the two separate array's i'm minimizing the risk somewhat in that a single HD failure only kills half of my storage data.
Option (b) is secure and I could fail 2xHD's (but not from the same array) and still see no performance hit, that's good. But I lose half my capacity and it still forces me to accept multiple drive letters and multiple Raid arrays to manage.
Option (c) keeps me with a single drive letter and Raid array to manage plus give me some security in that I can fail 1xHD which is good. I lose one third of my storage capacity, and I will see a performance hit while I rebuild a failed drive. Also, like you said 4xHD's on a singe on board raid controller seems a task better suited for a dedicated Raid controller card.
Option (d) is the most secure because the data can survive failing 2xHD's and still see no performance hit, plus I only have one drive letter and Raid array to manage so that's great. But I lose half of my storage capacity, and again this leaves me with 4xHD's on a single on board Raid controller.
I think i'm leaning toward (a) or (d) right now, but (c) is still a viable option of compromise.
Thanks for all your help!
Build Info:
CPU: Intel Core i7-3930K 3.2GHz 6-Core Processor
CPU Cooler: Noctua NH-D14 SE2011 CPU Cooler
Motherboard: Asus P9X79 PRO ATX LGA2011 Motherboard
Memory: Corsair Vengeance LP 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR3-1600 Memory
Storage: Samsung 830 Series 128GB 2.5" Solid State Disk
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Seagate Barracuda 1TB 3.5" 7200RPM Internal Hard Drive
Storage: Samsung 830 Series 512GB 2.5" Solid State Disk
Video Card: PNY Quadro 4000 2GB Video Card
Case: Antec P280 ATX Mid Tower Case
Power Supply: Kingwin Lazer Platinum 1000W 80 PLUS Platinum Certified ATX12V / EPS12V Power Supply
Optical Drive: Asus BC-12B1ST/BLK/B/AS Blu-Ray Reader, DVD/CD Writer
Operating System: Microsoft Windows 7 Professional Full (32/64-bit)