My view of raid

Do you have a question? Post it now! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View

I replied to a post on

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That would be Raid 1 or "mirroring"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

That would be Raid 0 or "striping"

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Well, since he is doing 3d modeling, a Raid 0 setup would be benificial for
him, as well as 4 gbs of good ram, including 2 gbs of  dual channel memory.
As for being expensive, I forked out $160 each for Western Digital 80 and
120 gb hard drives with 8 mb cache and UDMA 100, thats 100 mb/second. Now
you can purchase a SATA II 250 gb HD with 16 mb cache for $170 with a UDMA
equivalent of 3 gigabytes/second( thats Western Digital and in Canadian
dollars)(Sata is 1.5 gb/s).Put that in a raid 0 config and you have a
screamer. And from what I have been reading on the new motherboards, it
looks like you can also setup your storage drives in raid also. Like I've
said, don't scimp on your motherboard or you will regret it. Video editors
and dvd burnering computer power users take note.

Re: My view of raid

Quoted text here. Click to load it

. And from what I have been reading on the new motherboards, it
Quoted text here. Click to load it

A Raid 0 setup is fine for your primary OS drive and for the apps/data you
really want the speed on. Over the past couple of years, we've had instances
where servers running Raid5 had a drive go out, and even though it's not
supposed to do this, lost the entire array and had to rebuild the entire
server and restore from tape backup. This happened on two different Dell
servers. We've had 5 drive failures over three years on servers that are now
over three years old. 3 of them were simply pull, replace and the array
rebuilt the drive and motored on. Two were total array failures. Doesn't
exactly inspire confidence. On my home system, I use twin 36gig Raptors in
Raid 0 and back them up weekly to an external 200gig HDD. Data is on a 200
gig SATA Seagate and this gets backed up to the external also. The speed
gain from the Raid 0 is impressive, but I don't really trust it's longevity.

Re: My view of raid

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Re: My view of raid

Augustus wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Agree to an extent.  RAID0 is very useful for accessing persistent data
- programs, config files, O/S, utilities, drivers, etc.  Data files
should be placed on separate hard drives.  But rather than using an
external hard drive, it might be more convenient and time productive to
use an onboard RAID1 mirroring.

 From a performance perspective, drive performance doesn't have much
dependency on the drive interface.  IDE100 will provide the same
throughput as SATA II.  Actuall hard drive performance is pretty much
maxed out at between 50mbs and 80mbs, significantly below SATA potential.

On a workstation doing 3d modelling, I'd use two WD160 SATA II hard
drives in RAID0 as the O/S and program drive.  Tests indicate that the
36gig Raptor isn't much faster than the WD 160gb SATA II drives.
Probably won't notice the difference.  (see Anadtech hard drive tests)

For data, a pair of WD250 or WD320 Cavier RE SATA drives in RAID1 for
data files, parameter information and associated volatile data.  The RE
series of WD drives are specifically designed for RAID1 and have a very
high MTBF and low predicted failure rate.

Might also consider a really good video card and a processor with 1mb of
cache and 2.2ghz or better clock (San Diego or new Opteron).  Definitely
agree that 4gb of RAM is not overkill, but I'd try to set up all the
memory in dual channel.  Not sure whether it would be cost effective to
get faster then CAS2.5 memory.

The system configured as above would perform OK for this kind of

Re: My view of raid

Hey ... if you want speed.. then here are some helpers:

Crucial 2GB (2x1GB) DDR PC4000 Ballistix - 2x super fast 1GB sticks
(Thats DDR500 if you get a decent mobo and know how to configure it)
Otherwise GSkill or Geil or OCZ memory would probably get you the
tightest timings for 1GB sticks of PC3200 (400Mhz)
Use 3x Sata2 Hard Drives if you are doing RAID striping as they offer
optimum performance. (140MB/s avg read anyone? 340MB/s Burst, anyone?)

As for your data, Most decent boards do have onboard SATA/RAID but you
may want to investigate XFX Revo64 Controller. Its basically a SATA2
controller card which has RAID 3. (Sorry to chuck in RAID 3 as well)
which is
similar to RAID 5 but the performance doesnt die when you lose a drive.
Check out the mfs site:

I'd also advise on getting a dual core CPU (the one that has 1MB cache
on EACH core)

Re: My view of raid

You really cant compare raid 5 and raid 0 they are totally different
implementations. I personally run raid 5 on servers and raid 1 locally on
most workstations. It costs a bit more but it seems a lot more stable.

FWIW I have never liked Dells. Most of my servers I build myself, it cots
more, but they last longer. Dell uses too many Dell specific parts and when
it breaks on thursday, you wont get a replacement until wednesday. Not good
for business.
Dell is good for workstations though. If you need to buy like 10 computers.
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Site Timeline