Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

RAID 0,1 and 0+1?

Last response: in Storage
Share
September 5, 2005 2:34:03 AM

Hi, i just wanted to know if i'm going to buy two harddrives, than could i set one harddrive to raid 0 while the other to raid 1? also with raid 0+1, does this include 4 harddrives two for raid 0 and two for raid 1? And when last question does raid 0 or raid 1 wear or shorten a harddrives life span? thank you all.

More about : raid

September 5, 2005 2:46:01 AM

when you say Intel ICH7R, you mean intel matrix technology?
September 5, 2005 2:57:22 AM

So if i don't have intel matrix technology than i would have to use Silicon Image 3132 Controller, which requirs for a raid 0 two harddrives and the same for a raid 1? right? thank you.
Related resources
September 5, 2005 4:19:19 PM

Four drives is a bit expensive probably around 200 and more.

About raid 1, as i read in tomshardware that it's good for security, are we talking about virus and that kind of stuff, or a different kind of security issue. If raid 1 is for security what about data protection. is it more risky to put valuable data in raid 1, i know for sure it's risky for raid 0 but what about raid 1. I think to fix the data protection, i think raid 5 has to come into play. or if you just do a regular harddrive with no raid configurations.

I think if i'm going to be messing around i'll probably buy three harddrives with probably 120 gb or less, and put two on raid 0 and the other i don't know, i'm open to suggestions to what to do with the third drive.

If i'm going to go with four than i'll probably go with 80 drives, and that shouldn't be too expensive.

By the way, say i do configure my system to either raid 0+1 or 1+0, will harddrives in raid 0 or 1 have their different drive letter in windows or how are they seen by windows.
thank you.
September 5, 2005 6:29:15 PM

if you are using raid1 then the other HDD is just a mirror of your principal hdd, so, if you have 2x 120 gigs, then both drive has the same data. RAID0 strip the data on each HDD, so if you have 2x120 gigs, then it addup a 240, so if one fail, then the whole array will fail as there is only chunk of data on the hdd.

RAID 1 is secure, because you dont care about doing a backup, it is done automatically. This, create a false safety environnement, as if something goes wrong with the PSU or with the controller and both drive fries or get corrupted, you're done anyway. RAID0 is just like having one hdd. When you get 1 hdd, you know that it may fail, or not. If you get 2, one may fail, or not. but anyway, you are making backup on media outside your computer, so even if your computer burn in flame, your valuable data is still safe. If you do backup your data and you are using raid1, then you are wasting valuable storage place.

Dont get me wrong, I know that for enterprise with server that contain valuable data, raid is useful and even necessary. but we are talking about PSU that cost as much as your whole computer here... and what about the RAID card?.

personnal and commercial are 2 different thing. So, whatever raid you choose, it is always best to have a backup of personnal data. With dvd burner and dvd media cheap as they are now, it is the best protection someone can have.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")ώ(")
September 5, 2005 7:34:44 PM

I think i understand what you just said. according to you, in raid 0 information is spread into two drives, make it fast, but on the other hand one fails the whole array fails.

On the other hand on Raid 1 the size of the two harddrive is not comulative, because it keeps on copying the data to the other harddrive or between eachother, creating a backup of data.

Thank you for your reply.
September 5, 2005 8:54:48 PM

That's it. I use RAID0 since 2001 and no problem so far. I do keep backup, because of human error we all do sometime, but I never had an HDD to crash. It is true that I always put my array at the bottom of the case with a fan blowing fresh air on them.. Heat is the hdd killer. Sometime, having both hdd too close from each other (less than 1 inch) will cause them to overheat and start to act badly.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")ώ(")
September 5, 2005 10:04:44 PM

On your computer you only using Raid 0, that it, no other raid. If this is the case, since you been using it since 2001 it seems like that Raid 0 is not too bad after all. You might just have saved me time and confusion of this is true. I was planning on buying two harddrives for raid 0 and another drive for all important information. but since you been using raid 0 and it seems okay, i think i might do the same. But of course i'm going to back up my important files and documents ect....

What do you guys think i should get, which harddrive:

1) Maxtor DiamondMax 10 6B200S0 200GB Serial ATA 7200RPM Hard Drive w/16MB Buffer. this for 92 dollars (thinking of getting this one)
2)Maxtor Maxline III 7L250S0 250GB Serial ATA 7200RPM Hard Drive w/16MB Buffer. this for 104 dollars

look at these in terms of performance and not of money or storage. if you guys have any other recommanditions than please do give me names of harddrives to look for but in the same price range of the harddrives above.

from what i read from the website of maxtor these drives are the same speed and everything, don't see much difference. same rpm, same cache, the only difference is that one has <9.0 seek time and the other 9.3 seek, also the disk size, that's about it.

thank you all.
September 5, 2005 10:21:15 PM

uum, Wusy how many harddrives do you have on your system, and what is your Raid configuration? if you don't mind that is. thank you.
September 5, 2005 11:26:19 PM

I only have one array, which now consist of 2 seagate 160 gigs sata HDD. I did upgrade my HDD a couple of time, for storage need, but my old HDD are still running so I guess that my 2001 array would have been ok as of today. I have 2 other HDD for storage only.

If you get the 2 maxtor and want to set up a RAID0 array, then the 250 gigs will be use as a 200 gigs. You'll loose 50 gigs in the process because the total capacity is = to the size of the smallest hdd x by the number of drive.

I would get 2 identicals drives, this will ensure smooth and safe operation. I like Seagate better because thay have a 5 years warranty that makes them easier to sell when I need more storage. I dont care at the specs because, in a day to day bsis, every drive will perform the same or perform better by a non significant margin.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")ώ(")
September 5, 2005 11:59:04 PM

will i was planning to get to identical drives, weather the 2 maxtor 200 gigs or the 2 250 gigs. But it's good that you pointed out that with Raid 0 the largest drive must cut down to the smallest drive size. That for sure i didn't know, i was about to ask it, but you cleared it for me. thanks.
September 6, 2005 12:08:35 AM

Raid 5 to me is a little confusing. i have read the Raid FAQ on this forum, also the article on tomshardware website and don't understand what they mean by parity.

if i understand correctly, in Raid 5 the harddrives are sharing the information with eachother, and that there must be three harddrives for this to work. so what is this parity?

thank you.
September 6, 2005 12:22:58 AM

LoL, I expected another answer, but that's fine by me.
September 6, 2005 2:37:03 AM

This is where the XOR processor comes into play. RAID 5 works based on the following fact:

For a set of N bits, if you XOR compute all the bits together, you'll get a value (N+1) such that you can computer any single other value in the set by XOR computing the reminaing items and the N+1 value.

For example, assume you've got a 3 HDD RAID 5 array (A, B, and C). If you go bit by bit, drive C will be equal to (A XOR B), Drive A will be (B XOR C), and B will be (A XOR C). Thus should you lose one drive, the contents of that drive can be re-calculated based on the other two drives.

The other thing that's typically done in a RAID 5 array is that rather that drives A and B stripping (like RAID 0), and the parity check being put entirely on drive C, for the first two blocks of data A and B are the stripped data with C being the parity check, then the next two blocks are put on B and C with the parity check being on A, then the next blocks are on A and C with the partiy check being on B, etc.

And that, my friends, is the basics of a RAID 5 array.
September 6, 2005 5:29:04 AM

What processor do you currently have and how many HDs do you currwently have? Trust me, I am leading up to something.

Do you need 200GB Hd's, if you really dont then do yourself a favor and find some on sale. I pick up 60-120GB HDs for $40- $60 all the time.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 6, 2005 6:07:52 AM

Well i'm building a computer, all my other computers are old, so consider me with no harddrives at hand right now.

The processor that i already have, and ready to be build with my new system is a pentium 4 3.4ghz 1mb cache 800 fsb.

the reason why i'm leaning to buy this:
Maxtor DiamondMax 10 6B200S0 200GB Serial ATA 7200RPM Hard Drive w/16MB Buffer. this for 92 dollars.

is because of it's 16 mb cache, also has NCQ and it's size too and of course it's price. After i have two i'm going to have 400gb set on Raid 0. i'm going to try Raid 0 see how it works, if it doesn't work too well with me, than i just do it the old fashion way with no raid configuration.

if you have any suggestions please feel free to give them to me.

thank you for the help.
September 6, 2005 11:10:09 AM

Which MOBO are you using? I would look at this a bit differently if it was my choice. I would probably lean towards buying a new MOBO that supported the INTEL Matrix RAID technonolgy. Use older HD's until you can afford to get the ones you want. I really like the Matrix RAID, you get the best of both worlds. Just something to think about.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 6, 2005 3:01:53 PM

The motherboard that i current have to build is a Asus P5LD2 Deluxe. It has intel matrix raid, and also it has the silicon image controller build into it.

Also my old hdd came with my Pentium III dell and another computer which has a pentium 4 motherboard which is pretty old. The harddrives in those computer are not SATA, they are i think one is ATA 100 or 133 i'm not sure but they use that interface. One of those harddrives is very old and is a 40 gig and another which is newer than that which is 20 gig.

Any suggestions please due feel free to tell.

thank you.
September 6, 2005 10:17:09 PM

Where do you live? If your in the states start watching CircuitCity and Bestbuy each week. They come up with some really good bargains sometimes even on SATA drives. What are you doing with the system and how much HD space do you need? I would use the Matrix RAID with 2 HDs if I were you. Well, I guess I should wait for your reply before making such strong statements.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 6, 2005 10:29:38 PM

AFAIK, XOR is the only way that RAID 5 if implemented. if something else is used, please let me know. Whether it's good for your usage or not is something entirely separate from how it works.
September 7, 2005 12:39:09 AM

I live in new york, brooklyn. I never though of buying a harddrive from CircuitCity or Bestbuy, i think they might sell it for a more expensive price, but who knows you might be right. should i look at CircuitCity and Bestbuy online or street stores?

Well with the system i'm going use it to watch movies, play games, do mulimedia homeworks and webdesign. might uncompress large files here and there.

Anyways how does intel matrix do a Raid 0+1 with two harddrives, do you know how that works. From what i understand with hardware controllers you need two drives for raid 1 and two for raid 0, so how does intel matrix do it.

just curious, have you used the intel matrix technology and also used silicon image? if you have which has a better performance?

thank you.
September 7, 2005 3:52:00 AM

Wuzy, even the Intel based ones contain a XOR calculation unit built into the I/O Controller (see third para of the "High integration" section <A HREF="http://www.intel.com/design/iio/iop331.htm" target="_new">here</A>).

And I don't know where you got the idea about me raving RAID 5 infront of you. I think it's a stupid thing to implement, all I did was explain how the hell it worked.
September 7, 2005 1:30:36 PM

I think freud might say you have RAID5 envy....

__________________________________________
Chaintech VNF3-250/A64 2800+/1GB(512x2) OCZ VX GOLD 2-2-2-5/BFG 6800GT/Thermaltake 420W/WD 200GB/Maxtor 300GB
September 8, 2005 6:39:57 PM

Ive used both the Matrix RAID that only uses two HDs and RAID 0+1 with 4 HDs. Matrix works great but so do the other. It simply comes down to how many HDs you have. If you only have two then Matrix RAID is a good solution, if you have 4 then go the other way.

Circuit City and Best Buy tend to have better deals than anything you will find online. You just have to catch them at the right time. I buy a ton of computer equipment so price matters to me. My main sytem has 6 HDs in it and an external HD.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 9, 2005 10:40:11 AM

One reason why i wanted to buy those large harddrives was that it has a 16mb cache, so i though it might be faster than the 8mb ones?

But what do you think, should i buy one harddrive that is 250gb, 16mb cache and maybe when the price goes down i should buy another to do a raid 0, or should i just buy two small harddrives about the size of 120 or less with 8mb cache and just put them in raid 0?

thank you.
September 9, 2005 4:53:44 PM

The first question is how much HD space to you really need. There may be a speed difference between the 8 and 16MB cashe but I doubt that you will notice it.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 10, 2005 1:15:46 PM

I think i need about 200gb and above, around there. but no more than 300gb, that just too much for me.
September 14, 2005 10:39:03 PM

I never had any experience with Raid 0, you think it's an advantage having two harddrives in raid 0 rather than the old style which is one large hardrive of 200 or 160 gb?

thank you.
September 14, 2005 11:25:24 PM

Yes theres an advantage but theres also negatives such as data loss. There are simple steps like backing up data that will prevent loss of data or you could just do the matrix raid and have the best of both worlds.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 14, 2005 11:46:41 PM

could you give an example where the raid 0 would make a difference in determines of speed. I don't really keep vauleable data in my computer unless i back it up. so raid 0 is alright with me.
September 15, 2005 2:42:33 AM

mozzartusm, do you have a raid 0 setup, or did you used to have a raid 0 setup. if you had this setup, could you please tell me where did you notice the speed or performance difference? thank you.
September 16, 2005 1:48:03 AM

Ive got a RAID 0, a RAID 1, a RAID 0+1, and an Intel Matrix RAID array. Im into benchmarking, so I doubt that my results would tell you much. The RAID 0 is the fastest of all of them.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
September 16, 2005 4:02:42 AM

With intel matrix, one could make Raid 0+1 with two HDD only?

thank you.
September 18, 2005 2:47:34 AM

Yes, the Matrix technology allows this to be done on 2Hds. In case my previous reply confused you, I have aprox 20 HDs so each of the arrays that I mentioned exist independently of each other.

ASUS P5WD2 Premium
Intel 3.73 EE @ 5.6Ghz
XMS2 DDR2 @ 1180Mhz

<A HREF="http://valid.x86-secret.com/records.php?PHPSESSID=792e8..." target="_new">#2 CPUZ</A>
SuperPI 25secs
!