SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
01-07-11, 03:34 PM | #1 |
Lucky Sailor
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rome
Posts: 4,272
Downloads: 81
Uploads: 0
|
Yay Raid!!
So i built this machine few years ago, and made a 500GB RAID 0 drive as my primary, 2 250GB drives. This past november, I picked up a 750 GB drive for cheap to use a backup drive.
Installed it, booted up the machine, and my Nvidia mobo software popups asking if I would like to add the new drive to my array, and then convert it to RAID 5. Why yes I would! Lost 500gb of usable space, (as each drive can't be over 250g), but the RAID 5 makes using a backup drive a moot point. Well 2 days ago, one of the 250g drives failed. This has forced me to order 3 1 TB drives to replace them all, but the computer is still running, and I can easily migrate each drive into the array, albeit slowly. Yay 2 TB RAID 5 FTW!!! |
01-07-11, 03:53 PM | #2 |
Admiral
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 2,014
Downloads: 26
Uploads: 0
|
Raid is a wonderful thing for reliability and up time
But remember to have a plan for disaster recovery... |
01-07-11, 05:00 PM | #3 |
Ace of the Deep
|
I'm not sure how to understand that bit but if you mean backup is now a thing of the past, I would say you're heading for disaster.
One day... Murphy's law... lightning... self!... But as said - not sure what the quoted phrase means. |
01-07-11, 11:08 PM | #4 |
Lucky Sailor
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rome
Posts: 4,272
Downloads: 81
Uploads: 0
|
Ahh...
I bought the 750g drive to be used as a backup drive, in case one of the 2 250's failed, but since it easily incorporated the 750 into the raid, converting the RAID 0 into a RAID 5, it made MY need for a separate backup drive moot. Obviously there are instances where separate independent drives are needed, but I'm not one of them. When I get the 2 TB drive up and running, I will use the 750gb drive as a back up of my important files and such. |
01-08-11, 01:10 AM | #5 |
Ace of the Deep
|
Phew! Thank you!
I'm too easily worried on others behalf... |
01-08-11, 01:32 AM | #6 |
Lucky Sailor
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Rome
Posts: 4,272
Downloads: 81
Uploads: 0
|
Just noticed that i ordered 3 SATA2 drives, since the standard is supposed to be backwards compatible, and I'm throttled in other areas anyways, I shouldn't see a huge performance hit should I?
|
01-08-11, 03:42 AM | #7 |
Navy Seal
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese.
Posts: 8,467
Downloads: 53
Uploads: 10
|
Performance hit? Mechanical drives are completely incapable of saturating sata2.
Might wanna make sure you have sata3 board and drives if you go SSD though.
__________________
Contritium praecedit superbia. |
01-09-11, 07:05 AM | #8 | ||
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: CG 96
Posts: 861
Downloads: 22
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
From the sounds of things it looks like you're using the RAID controller on the motherboard? If so, be carefull that if your board dies you'll need to get the exact same one, or one with the same exact chipset so the new controller can read the disk indexes to figure out the disk mapping. Quote:
The fastest IO I can get out of mine (a Dell Poweredge with a 6 port RAID 64 bit card using 5 WD RE5 500gb drives) is only sustained read or write of 65 mb/sec. Unless you use SSD, Raptor or 15k drives there's no way you'll need to worry about IO being a bottleneck as they'll never come close to their full 3 gb/sec rating. Now that the perpendicular magnetic storage is starting to trickle down to consumer level products these massive disks won't be such a liabilty to overheating or burning out prematurely. |
||
01-09-11, 07:13 AM | #9 |
Navy Seal
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese.
Posts: 8,467
Downloads: 53
Uploads: 10
|
Ya I had 2x250GB Western Digital RE drives in a RAID0 for a while. Ran out of space though, just replaced it with a fast 640GB one. Don't think the benefits to general gaming are really that pronounced, can't say I notice the difference at least.
*why RAID5 btw? I get it for the reduncancy, but you lose performance gains. Unless you're running a server, I would really suggest RAID0. (And that you not put critical data on it, should it fail.) ** nvm, had my raid levels mixed up
__________________
Contritium praecedit superbia. |
01-09-11, 10:57 AM | #10 | |
Grey Wolf
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: CG 96
Posts: 861
Downloads: 22
Uploads: 0
|
Quote:
Data is the most important thing, and hardest to replace. A raptor with a cheap equal sized sata drive to mirror it along with the RAID 5 on the server is pretty much bullet proof. If I had a couple TB drives I would make backups onto those every few weeks, otherwise just count on the integrity of the aray to do its job and be sure to make images of my OS drives every onece in awhile in case they do take a dive. |
|
|
|