Installing OS on a software RAID not recommended?

[jtvang125]

I just picked up a cheap pcie sata card that has 2 ports. It supports RAID 1 or 0. What I wanted to do is use 2 500gb in RAID 0 for my OS, games and downloads and a 3rd 500gb standalone for my important docs/files. However I read in the manual that installing an OS on a RAID isn't recommended. So then what are the reasons and consequences if I do?

 

[mpilchfamily]

While RAID 0 will offer slightly faster startup in windows there are risks. Namely the fact that a RAID 0 isn't particularly stable. Raid 0s crash all the time. When they do you are rairly able to recover the information. So anything you have on that raid should be stuff your willing to loose.

 

[Madwand1]

No, it's not recommended, even for a RAID 5 configuration, let alone a RAID 0. The problem is that when you're installed on a complex RAID configuration (and any striped configuration is considered "complex" here), if you have a serious issue with it, and your OS is on it, you're dead. You can't get boot the OS, you pretty much can't do anything unless you install the OS on a separate drive and go from there, and even then you might not have any luck getting the original OS working.

Consider keeping the OS and important stuff on one drive (or two), and all the replaceable programs and data on the other in the RAID configuration. Even copy the saved games/etc., across once in a while.

There's some chance that you'll have absolutely no issues with the RAID 0 in its expected lifetime. However, there's a chance you will, and if you did have even one issue, it'd be far better to not have that issue spill over to your OS.

 

[yhelothar]

I don't see what the problem is here. He has all his important stuff on a separate drive, so who cares if the OS dies, just reinstall it.
I've used RAID0 twice with both times it crashing on me within 3 years. But the first time I had about 1% corruption and I was able to recover 99% of the stuff. The second time, I had mass corruption too, but chkdsk was able to sort it out, and I was able to do a clone onto a good drive.
All my important stuff were on there both times.. I was lucky I didn't lose anything.
On the other hand, I just lost a 250GB drive I used as backup for some important files... lost everything on there.

It's just double the risk guys, and for most hard drive errors I've had, I was able to recover the stuff before it was totally lost.

btw, if you buy one 1.5TB or 2TB drive, it'll be about as fast as your RAID0 config for two 500GB.

 

[RebateMonger]

There's nothing intrinsically wrong with software RAID (associated with an inexpensive RAID card). You just need solid hardware, solid firmware, and solid drivers. As you spend more money, these likely become "more-solid".

I've run my personal servers on $70 IDE and SATA RAID controllers for several years. All my personal computers and servers get backed up nightly with NTBackup and Windows Home Server, so a failue of my RAID arrays aren't likely to cause any significant data loss.

As long as you have a good way to restore your computer, I don't see anything wrong with using a lower-end RAID card for RAID 0 or RAID 1. As always, automate your backups, set up feedback so you know they've been successful, and test the backups periodically to ensure that you can actually recover data from them.

 

[OfficeLinebacker]

Originally posted by: RebateMongerAs always, automate your backups, set up feedback so you know they've been successful, and test the backups periodically to ensure that you can actually recover data from them.

What? Good advice? Common sense? Am I in the right forum? lol