• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Is 120GB X 2 RAID Overdoing it?

X

x86

Banned
Is having (2) 120GB WD Caviar HDD @ 7200RPM on RAID configuration overdoing it? Because that's what I have. 🙂

I just wanted some feedback.
 
i hope its RAID 1 (although i doubt it), or i hope you have ways of backing it up, cus if your raid array takes a crap or one of your hdd's do, you can say goodbye to that 240GB of stuff. (i would not trust an IDE RAID 0 array with anything important unless i was backing it up)
 
I almost think that is overkill, but in about 1 year it wont be!

Thats pretty badass though! (I think your just trying to show off😉
 
I considered the fact that HDDs usually fill up in a year or two, so I planned for the future. They are set up using an integrated RAID controler, in RAID 0 configuration. (240GB @7200RPM : Drooool) These HDD are 2MB cache. If they were the SE 8MB, it would cost me about $250.00 more.

As for the price, I would like you to guess how much I paid for the HDDs. 🙂

-x86
 
PLEEEEASE tell me you have 240gb worth of tape backup for those drives??? That woudl be a horrible mess if one of the drives died with no backups :-(
 


<< PLEEEEASE tell me you have 240gb worth of tape backup for those drives??? That woudl be a horrible mess if one of the drives died with no backups :-( >>



Funny... I have been thinking about that...

-x86
 
I plan to pick up 2 IBM 120 GIGR's soon too.

I know IBM is suck, but hey, I like them, and I have two 60 gigr's right now.

Working pretty good.
 


<< i can already see the post in the future Dammit!!!! i just lost 240gigs of stuff >>



I thought that it would be @$#%^ ibm %$#@ me they didn't say i couldn't run them for more than 2 weeks a month as the rma guy is trying to tell me now Here

man get the western digitals a much better deal IMHO😉


x86 smart move😀
 
That's a lot of pr0n.

What would be the best way to back that up? Even a DVD-burner only puts 4.7 gig on a disc.
 
I would be lucky if i filled up 20 gigs of the WD1200JB HD with 8 mb of cache. But i would not mind having the extra space just to have it plus the HD will be faster than a smaller HD with the same amount full. I may only fill up 5 to 15 gigs if even that hehe.

 
I see alot of people recomending a full 120gig backup and wonder why. Is all that 120gig filled up with "data," created by programs? I never backup my programs! just the data the the programs create. Saves alot of backup space. Yea, i created a CD of my operating system when it was freshly installed, and I re-create it whenever I make a hardware change. I make sure and keep all Install CD's in good condition!


Is it more important to backup a RAID 0 the it is a single disk? I mean if a solo 120gig disk system bites it the data is just as effectivly destroyed as a Raid 0, isn't it?
 


<< I see alot of people recomending a full 120gig backup and wonder why. Is all that 120gig filled up with "data," created by programs? I never backup my programs! just the data the the programs create. Saves alot of backup space. Yea, i created a CD of my operating system when it was freshly installed, and I re-create it whenever I make a hardware change. I make sure and keep all Install CD's in good condition! >>


of course we're talking about data, not programs. divx, mp3's, pron, warez, that can fill up 240 gigs easy. 240GB of programs? come on.

ya should have gotten 4 60/80GB and did a RAID 5 or something. of course assuming you have bottomless pockets 😛😉
 
hm.

if you don't already have the drives... but i think you said you did... but anwyays:

i think it would be better to do a four drive raid 0 array. the returns in speed should be much more noticable. And i also heard that doing software raid through windows it better than the software raid of the cards themselves such as the promise tx2/4.

so it should be cheaper and have better performance with four 60 gigs, which in the future if you wanted the redudancy, just recreate the array into raid 0 + 1, with the same space as the 120 gigs in raid one, but also the speed of raid 0 for less money, just a bit more heat, and two less spaces in your case.

But do realize this increases the risk of failure by a factor of two. (but with raid 0, which is what i think you are considering, that always seems to be an "acceptable" risk... heh...)

-Mel

 


<<

<< I see alot of people recomending a full 120gig backup and wonder why. Is all that 120gig filled up with "data," created by programs? I never backup my programs! just the data the the programs create. Saves alot of backup space. Yea, i created a CD of my operating system when it was freshly installed, and I re-create it whenever I make a hardware change. I make sure and keep all Install CD's in good condition! >>


of course we're talking about data, not programs. divx, mp3's, pron, warez, that can fill up 240 gigs easy. 240GB of programs? come on.

ya should have gotten 4 60/80GB and did a RAID 5 or something. of course assuming you have bottomless pockets 😛😉 >>



Um, isn't the minimum number of disks in a RAID 5 array 6?
 
I tried a software array with three drives in Win 2k. With my bus at 150 I kept losing the array, so I found a hacked bios to support 4 drives instead of 2 on the onboard raid controller. It has been more stable, but not perfect. I am curious, has anyone had a software array running under 2k or XP stably, and for a reasonable amount of time?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top