I am in the process of building a new system for extremly Graphics and File intensive operation, and finding the best RAID setup for reliable data transfer.
In connection with this I have been working on debugging this system.
After intensive discussion with WD we have now concluded that one of my new WD2500JS SATA II drives must have surface damage on it. On the WD Diagnostics Extended Read and Write zero tests it performs 20% slower than the other identical drive, so I will send it back. Through this discussion with WD it became clear that the "desktop models" of their drives (which includes the WD2500JS in question) performed extended error correction work before responding to requests from the controller. When this happens in a RAID 0 array it ends up responding to the controller request to late, and thus the controller consideres the drive as having gone offline.
The suggested solution to this would be to use one of the Raid Edition drives (SD, YR series). However these are only SATA 1.5 Gb/s series drives, and thus have a lower transfer rate than the 300 MB/s rate. As so many times in life you cant have it all (yet)... The question is which is better:
a) 2 SATA WD2500JS / WD2500KS drives which in case of surface errors may timeout, but during normal operation handles a transfer rate of 300 MB/s.
b) 2 SATA WD2500SD or WD4000YR Raid Edition drives, with a limit on error correction before responding to the Controller but with a transfer rate of only 1.5 Gb/s.
Its like taking out an insurrance policy - maybe you need it, and maybe you don't...
Both types have seek time of appx 8.9 ms, so no difference there.
What would provide the best efficiency RAID setup?
Tsunami Dream VA3000BNA - ASUS K8N SLI/Premium - AMD Athlon 64 4000+ - Corsair TWINX1024-3200C2PRO
ASUS EN6800GT - Creative SB X-FI Extreme - Sapphire ATI Theatrix TV Tuner Card w remote
SeaSonic 12-600W - 2 x 250GB WD2500JS SATAII HD
Stephen Odgaard<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by sso on 10/12/05 06:20 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
SATA 300 drives aren't faster than SATA 150. Let me put that a different way: Since drives can't do any more than around 110 peak and 70 from the platters, 150 is just as fast as 300.
Your moped won't go faster on the autobahn either, sorry.
<font color=blue>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to a hero as big as Crashman!</font color=blue>
<font color=red>Only a place as big as the internet could be home to an ego as large as Crashman's!</font color=red>