I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

[motorboatJones]

I have a 200GB WD SATA I drive. I was looking on newegg and saw 120GB SATA II drives for less than $60. I was surprised at how cheap they are, so cheap that now I'm thinking of selling the 200GB drive and getting two 120s for a RAID 0 array.

If you have done this, is it worth it? thanks

[Merlin]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

Raid 0 will only improve loading times, other than that it is a pain to set up and if the Raid 0 partition fails you loose all your data stored over the two drives.

[venny]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

its no really such a pain to set up. jus remember to press f6 when u install your os.

[absoluteczech]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

i heard the new perpendicular hd by segate are as fast has a raptor almost and are only 7200rpm and alot cheaper, you should buy 2 of these.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16822148140

250gb is only 79.99 2x those would be faster then any other 7200rpm if its possible..

[megawhompertoo]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

It's no longer such a pain to set up, depending on your mobo's drivers and bios raid setup interface.

As stated before, however, a read/write error that might normally result in a corrupt file or directory (plain-jane non-raid0) can result in an unreadable volume in an array.

If you want the performance of raid0, then best to keep an external HD with all your critical data, databases, contacts, manuscripts, articles, home movies, pictures, etc. on it, or keep said files in a specific folder and back it up to DVD-RW regularly.

Or do both, if you're paranoid like me--and I'm not even running raid0 anymore.

One thing you can do to boost performance in a non-raid0 setup is to put the windows swapfile on a secondary HD. That way, the hd doesn't have to spend time reading an executable/library, then stopping that task, seeking the pagefile on another part of the hd, writing/reading to/from the pagefile, then moving back to the executable's instructions...etc.

[motorboatJones]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

Thanks for the feedback. I think I'll not bother with it if the potential for data loss is that high. The positives don't outweigh the negatives.

[megawhompertoo]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

Thanks for the feedback. I think I'll not bother with it if the potential for data loss is that high. The positives don't outweigh the negatives.

The relative risk is a little bit overstated. An array in RAID0 is more prone to total data loss than an exactly equal system running without. But the "more prone" is highly dependent on how you treat the pc, whether the electricity spikes, shuts down the pc, and leaves orphan files lounging about to cause problems later, whether the ram is decent--Servers can much more reliably run arrays in part due to their the memory being buffered and the support of error checking (ECC) (there are MANY other factors that lend stability to servers, though).

If you've got the money to burn, it never hurts to give it a try. Back your stuff up regularly, and if you find yourself acutally having to do system restores/reinstalls every two months then take them out of array and enjoy having two good independent hd's.

[Merlin]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

The pain is working out what is the best sector size to use is.

[Heavy552 AWG]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

I have two Maxtor 7200 STAT's on RAID 0.

The motherboard is a ASUS P4P-800-E Deluxe. It already has a RAID controller onboard.

Boot computer normally into windows because I keep it on a IDE disk.

The RAID functions on my computer is after the POST but before the windows logo. Those functions allow me to tear down, rebuild, add/remove drives etc etc etc.

I only had one failure of RAID and that was because one of the SATA cables worked loose. Since the MBR's were still valid rebuilding took a few moments.

RAID with Mirrior will take half of your total disk capacity but protects your data. Three raid disks or more gives you (If supported by hardware) an option to select a RAID mode that might give you total protection of data on the drives should one fail.

For me, a Maxtor One Touch III duplicates everything on this computer, games go on the RAID and windows and normal crap goes on C:\ theres another drive for storage.

Some RAID options require controllers to be purchased and installed. But this is less likely as new motherboards come into production supporting many RAID drives and options. IF presented with a need for a controller, get a HARDWARE based controller and not software.

To install Windows requires a floppy as others have stated using the F6 function. I find it is not really worth the effort. The old 7200 IDE drive runs about 110 mb/sec while the RAID approaches 150 Mb/Sec at times with a average of 120.

Anything one can do to move data faster to get into the game first or nearly so has a advantage. BF2 does not really enforce a 1 or two minute timer for everyone to wait before starting so those with slower systems/connections find themselves at spawn with no vehicles, some bases being taken and no oppertunity for command election.

RAID for me is just for games, should they fail, reinstalls of games takes a few moments and is not a stress problem.

[venny]

Re: I'm thinking of setting up a RAID 0 array

my com is purely for gaming. nothing lost if it fails except game files that i can reinstall. i have an older com for doing other stuff on. just food for thought. i link my 2 pc by lan and occasionally transfer some stuff over as backup to my other com.