Pros and Cons on partitioning RAID 0

[JD32]

Hi guys,
I'm still in process of building my new computer. I'm trying to set up 2 WD Raptors 36ghz on Raid 0. Would partitioning this slow it down? When I had single IDE HDD, I partitioned it into 2. so that I had drive C: 10Ghz only for Windows XP. and the rest for my datas and programs.
What are your thoughts?
Thanks

 

[nageov3t]

I wouldn't do it of course, I also hate RAID 0 for anything other than database servers with a strong passion

keep the drives separate... 1 for windows/programs, and 1 for data.

my setup right now is a 10K 36 GB Raptor for windows and programs, and a 250 GB drive for data-only.

 

[Zepper]

The pros and cons for partitioning RAID-0 are the same ones that have been argued to death for a single drive (which is what a RAID-0 array appears to be). As far as I'm concerned, if you aren't manipulating HUGE video files that take up a substantial portion of your space, etc., you should partition. I have 3 SCSI drives with a total of less than 20GB. Spread among them, I have drive letters C-L plus a fair sized chunk that's subdivided for Linux. Helps me keep things organized like a top-layer directory structure - each logical drive has a label that descriptive of what's in it.
. Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.
.bh.

 

[Jeff7]

Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.

Well, with a 2 disk array, the chances aren't even 2x greater of failure - from what little I remember of prob&stat in college, it's closer to a 1.4x chance of experiencing a drive failing, rather than a single drive. But still, it's always good to have a backup of your data. And it's even better when the backup doesn't fail.:Q

 

[VTrider]

Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.

This would also apply if you two independant drives in your system ofcourse right?

 

[OffTopic1]

What kinds of work are you doing that warrant a raid0 setup?

It would be a better choice to have raid1, raid5, or raid10 for data integrity, because you will not notice a performance increase in your average day to day operation.

That being said, I concur with other users that you might want to look into having a separate OS & data hdds sets for convenience.

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: VTrider

Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.

This would also apply if you two independant drives in your system ofcourse right?

Not necessarily, having 2 independence hdds one for OS & the other for data don?t equate to 2:1 failure rate.

 

[gsellis]

Originally posted by: Jeff7

Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.

Well, with a 2 disk array, the chances aren't even 2x greater of failure - from what little I remember of prob&stat in college, it's closer to a 1.4x chance of experiencing a drive failing, rather than a single drive. But still, it's always good to have a backup of your data. And it's even better when the backup doesn't fail.:Q

Straight MTBF calculation would hint that it would be half, but you are closer. What would be more realistic is MTBF and 2 standard deviations away (lower). Since these statistics are really made up (MTBF), it is hard to pin something down. So, if failure is 7 years with a standard deviation of 1 year, then it would be a good guess that it was closer to 5 years.

If you buy 2 lottery tickets, it is twice as likely you will win than with 1, but the chance is still about 100,000,000 to 1. Don't go buy a Ferrari because you are going to win since you bought a second lottery ticket.

 

[JBT]

I have the same question I am going to Raid 0 two 80GB 7K250 Hitachi's I was going to partition them like this
C: 25 Gig - System
D: 50 Gig - Applications
E: 85 Gig - Storage

Or should I just have a C System, and D Drive the rest?

Which Partition should I have my swap file on also? I have tried it on my current system and never noticed it mattering.

THX. Sorry for the hijack though

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: JBT
I have the same question I am going to Raid 0 two 80GB 7K250 Hitachi's I was going to partition them like this
C: 25 Gig - System
D: 50 Gig - Applications
E: 85 Gig - Storage

Or should I just have a C System, and D Drive the rest?

Which Partition should I have my swap file on also? I have tried it on my current system and never noticed it mattering.

THX. Sorry for the hijack though

There would no advantage of having the swap partition in a difference partition other than C: boot partition if you only have 2 hdds in raid0 configuration. However, you might notice some improvement if you have boot partition on a separate hdd and the swap partition on a quicker hdd.

As I have said in the above post, you will not see any improvement going for a raid0 configuration, while putting your data at a higher risk.

 

[neutralizer]

raid0 is fast, it's got wings
if one drive dies, the drive is dead. it's annoying to setup.

 

[Neyd3400]

I run a few raids over the last 6 years and I would definately recommend partitioning. I run dual 80 gigs with two partitions. One system and one for mulitmedia. For the simple reason of when I am searching for files or scanning mp3's within the system it is less time consuming to scan a seperate disk. Having seperate disk seem to make organizing files easier too. I suppose I could use differents folders, but it seems much easier to use partions. I have never noticed a sign of instability due to partioning.

Remember backup data.

 

[pcman83]

Raid 0 is awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Until it dies on you and I will never do it again.

 

[VTrider]

Originally posted by: OffTopic

Originally posted by: VTrider

Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.

This would also apply if you two independant drives in your system ofcourse right?

Not necessarily, having 2 independence hdds one for OS & the other for data don?t equate to 2:1 failure rate.

I just don't get it? So are you saying that just because you have 2 drives in a RAID 0 array the chances of one of them dying are greater than if you just had them on seperate channels in your system?

 

[OffTopic1]

Originally posted by: VTrider

Originally posted by: OffTopic

Originally posted by: VTrider

Oh, and not keeping an up-to-date, verified backup of a RAID-0 array is like flying an experimental airplane w/o a parachute. (c) 2000 - bh.

This would also apply if you two independant drives in your system ofcourse right?

Not necessarily, having 2 independence hdds one for OS & the other for data don?t equate to 2:1 failure rate.

I just don't get it? So are you saying that just because you have 2 drives in a RAID 0 array the chances of one of them dying are greater than if you just had them on seperate channels in your system?

Yes there is a greater change that one of the hdd pair fail is greater than 2 independence hdds in 2 separate partition, but it is not that much higher to worry.

However, It is easier to recover if all data is only on one drive than spliting mong drives on a raid-0 configuration. If your boot drive died you still can recover the data, and it is possible to recover some or all data from a single damage hdd depending on how bad it is.

Data recovery from a raid-0 partition failure is difficult if not impossible. You litterally have to swap the harware, that sometime entail moving the plater to another ciruit if the plater isn't damage from a head crash.

And, data recovery from a raid-0 configuration controler or mobo failure also is difficult, because you have to get the same controler & software to retrieve the data.

 

[VTrider]

I see what your saying now and agree with your points. In light of the pros and cons of an RAID 0 array I guess it all boils down to wether it will benefit the individual user in regard to what he/she uses the computer for.

I set up a RAID 0 array (2x120 WD) on my video editing system soley for the performance advantages it produces while working with large video files. My fear of my RAID 0 array failing stems from the realization that rebuiliding it just would be a bitch, I'm not worried at all about data loss at all though because like everybody else does (or should) I backup my data in a fool-proof fashion on a regular schedule and stick to it like glue

But to stay on topic....I don't think that partitioning/not partitioning a RAID 0 array would have any siginficant differences in terms of speed (but I could be wrong ofcourse)

 

[Berkut]

I was planning on setting up a RAID 0 with a pair of Hitachi 80GB drives for a new system that is primarily used for gaming and some software development.

Is the performance difference noticeable between RAID 0 when it comes to things like gaming?

How would one go about backing up a 160GB total capacity RAID 0 system?

 

[JBT]

Originally posted by: Berkut
I was planning on setting up a RAID 0 with a pair of Hitachi 80GB drives for a new system that is primarily used for gaming and some software development.

Is the performance difference noticeable between RAID 0 when it comes to things like gaming?

How would one go about backing up a 160GB total capacity RAID 0 system?

I will pretty much be doing the same as you but I really have no mission critical data and the stuff that I do will be sent to my offsite FTP server and my current IDE System drive.

I belive Raid 0 will help loading huge maps in games like desert combat or oppening up other large files where max throughput is concerned.

 

[boyRacer]

I have 4 partitions in my array... no problems.

 

[MichaelD]

Originally posted by: bR
I have 4 partitions in my array... no problems.

Same here. Used to have my OS on one and programs/data/backups on all others.

Recently moved to a SCSI boot drive. Still have the four partitions on the IDE Raid stripe though.

As has been said, the "rules" for partitioning a single IDE drive don't change when being applied to one big logical drive (RAID 0 stripe)

I would put the OS on the first partition, as it will be a bit faster than the outer partitions.

 

[Schadenfroh]

An angel on a raptor
Pulls across to greet a fellow computer junky
Puts his rig up on it's stand
Leans back and then extends
A scarred and greasy screw driver...he said

"How ya doin bro?...where ya been?...where ya goin'?"

Then he takes your hand
In some strange Californian handshake
And breaks the bone

"Have a nice day"

A housewife from Encino
Whose husband's at E3
With his notebook and PDA
Breaks and makes a 'U' and idles back
To take a second look at you
You flex your mouse
Fish takes the hook
Sweet Western and Digital in her breath
Another hard drive in your little black book

These are the pros and cons of partitioning
These are the pros and cons of partitioning
Oh babe, I must be dreaming
I'm standing on the leading edge
The Eastern seaboard spread before my eyes
"Jump" says Yoko Ono
"I'm too scared and too good looking" I cried
"Go on", she says
"Why don't you give it a try?
Why prolong the agony all men must die"
Do you remember Loki?
Do you remember Zepper?

Child: "And mother wants you"

Could you see him selling Hardware
Where the tiger circles direct

Child: "JD"

The body on the plain
Did you understand the RAID0, JD?
Or was it all in vain?

Child: "JD"

The Bios screen said something mystical "Alt-F4 to enter RAID setup"
So I stepped back on the cluster size

These are the pros and cons of partitioning
These are the pros and cons of partitioning
Oh babe, I must be dreaming again
These are the pros and cons of partitioning

 

[gsellis]

Actually, partitioning any drive config will reduce performance. Especially if the OS is in one of them. But, it you don't compare it to itself, you may never notice. If you are a mushroom about the difference, why should you care? Do what you feel works.