• 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.

RAID 0: 45GB 75GXP & 40GB 60GXP. Is this possible?

No it is not possible 🙂 Volumes & disk speeds must be identical... if you sacrifice the 5 gigs on the one drive to duplicate the volumes, the speed still differs slightly...
 
i thought it was your setup runs at 2X the slowest drive speed, and your space is 2X the smallest drive??? are you sure about this guys?
 
As far as I understand it its perfectly possible, you'll just lose the 5gigs from the one drive. RAID-0 will only match drives that are the same size. If the drives are different, it will merely ignore the bigger drive and only use the space available on the smaller drive.

At least that's how I remember.
 
One other thing to consider, 75gxp & 60gxp drives are not identical. They run @ slightly different speeds. Syncing would be unlikely...
 
Read up on RAID, people. Of course it is possible, but you are either going to end up with a 40 gig mirrored drive, or an 80 gig striped drive.

~bex0rs
 
Is it possible? yes, but you'll lose 5 GB

Would I do it? nope, like Fkloster said different drives won't be running at the exact same speed, which could result in a higher risk of failure.
 
Would it work? Possibly.
Would it work like it's supposed to, or at all? Highly unlikely.

I just set up my first RAID 0 array last week. The drives should be the same make, model and size because:

1. Different manufacturers use diff circuitry in the controller board which makes the drives behave differently.

2. Different models may have different firware...and that'll screw you up but good.

3. Different size drives have different platter capacities (credit Noriaki for smartening me up on this one) and will have diff access times.


That's three that I can think of. i'm sure there are more. If you're gonna do something, do it right or not at all. BTW, I have 36 dozen assorted IDE cables for sale; do you need any? J/K 😀
 
FWIW, I cut 'n pasted from this article on RAID.

This level of RAID involves striping, where reads and writes of sectors of data are interleaved between multiple drives. Essentially, the workload is balanced between all the drives in the array, so performance is increased. It is recommended that you use identical hard drives for the greatest increase in performance. Although it is recommended, it is not necessary. The disk array capacity is equal to the number of drives times the smallest drive. The speed of the array will depend on the speed of the slowest hard drive. So for example, using a 10 GB and a 20 GB hard drive will create a 20 GB disk array. That's a lot of wasted space, so using two identical drives is definitely the way to go. Performance in RAID 0 is also determined by the stripe size used. Larger stripe sizes may be better for video editing and large file movement, while smaller stripe sizes might be better for everyday apps. Since the Ashton Peripheral Computer In&Out™ IDE RAID Controller does not let you specify the size, it defaults to 16kb. A disadvantage of this level is that if one of the drives fail, the entire array is lost...

Please explain why you think running 2 drives that aren't identical in a RAID configuration would result in a higher risk of failure. I assume you mean as compared to running 2 identical drives.

[edit] BTW, I would personally never run 2 mismatched IDE drives in a RAID configuration, but that is just personal preference.

~bex0rs
 
Yes, this would work, but it is not advised by the RAID manufacturers. It would get you the space of the smallest drive X2 and it is only going to be able to go about 2X as fast as the slower drive. The two drives are not physically linked in a RAID configuration. Their cables just go to a separate card. Why would they NEED to be identical? I suppose it might put added strain on the RAID controller to dole out the stripes of information, but it shouldn't be a huge deal. Best performance is achieved with two identical drives.
 
Yes, of course it is possible. You'll just lose the 5 gig on the larger drive and have a 40GB array. I've done it, but I really don't recommend it. You're far better off with two identical drives (at least, capacity).
 


<< AMD Athlon 4 (Palomino) Powered: >>



Pabster, you spelled Palamino wrong 🙂 (Jus kiddin' I guess you spelled it right, I just did a search. Many spell it wrong 🙂 )
 
That's what I figured. I'd like to know the facts on why I should't do it. Is it going to actually damage the drives? Why would it be 'not recommended' yet still okay at the same time?
 
It is &quot;Not Recommended&quot; but still OK because the card manufacturere doesn't want to support anything that isn't perfect. I created an 8.0GB array using a 2.0Gb and 2.1Gb WD, A 3.2 Seagate, and a 4.3 Samsung 🙂. The array ran fine AND faster than a modern 7200 RPM drive. I just did this to see if it was possible, and it was. I now run 4 2.0Gb WD drives. I do recommend using the same drives, but if you can't, I don't think you will run into any problems. Have a good day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top