RAID 0 or RAID 0+1 for programming workstation
- Thread starter naxeem
- Start date
- May 13, 2003
- 13,704
- 7
- 81
Well, a little bit more information would be useful? Are there any specific reasons you are considering RAID 0? What type of controller are you using? Are you concerned about hard drive space (ie RAID 0 vs RAID 1)? What are your performance requirements? How much data do you need to store, and what type of drives are you going to be using? Is this critical data you are going to be working with, or is this machine just for compiling the data and you want to do so as quickly as possible?
MichaelD
Lifer
- Jan 16, 2001
- 31,528
- 3
- 76
Welcome to the AT Forums! 
Will you be using onboard RAID or getting a hardware RAID card?
By "0+1" are you referring to a RAID1 mirror or a RAID10 mirrored stripe? If the latter, you will need a hardware RAID card and a minimum of 4 hard drives.
Most decent motherboards these days have onboard RAID (software RAID) which does a decent job as long as you're not too demanding. What I would do is have a 2-drive RAID1 mirror for my OS and programs and another HD for data and backups.
Will you be using onboard RAID or getting a hardware RAID card?
By "0+1" are you referring to a RAID1 mirror or a RAID10 mirrored stripe? If the latter, you will need a hardware RAID card and a minimum of 4 hard drives.
Most decent motherboards these days have onboard RAID (software RAID) which does a decent job as long as you're not too demanding. What I would do is have a 2-drive RAID1 mirror for my OS and programs and another HD for data and backups.
OK,
I have Gigabyte X38-DQ6 with ICH9R intel controller.
It supports up to 6 drives in RAID 0.
One strange thing is that it has a strange option:
In the menu it says: "RAID 10 (0+1)" but in the description it says: "Mirrors and then stripes" for the very same option.
So, I wonder which one is it.
The machine has 4 320GB Hitachi drives, 1 500GB Seagate and 1 external 500GB WD Book2.
I have ~ 400GB of regular data with projects and project backups, different documentation documents and literature (pdf, doc, etc). Also I have like 500GB of static data that I use only on ocassions (ISOs, music, video) and I play some games (Crysis e.g.).
On the machine I do development itself which includes ~3-10 parallel applications open in the same time.
I do the development and compilation on the same machine.
What I most need is ultimate responsivness. I need as fast as possible loading of files, compilation (compilation is done very, very often like 5 times in 15 minutese on average) and as fast as possible application switching (alt-tab) so I guess I need a fast page file.
No matter what RAID I choose I will do manual backup on daily basis.
RAID can protect from hard drive failure, but not from any other error.
Also, I will daily backup the whole system image (full drive backup) so system restoration is not a problem at all.
The only thing in question is:
RAID 0 or RAID 10? (which I still don't know if is 0+1 or 1+0, but will test by pulling 1 then 2nd drive from system ).
What best suits my needs and my style of work I've described up there.
Thank you for all advices and ideas!
I have Gigabyte X38-DQ6 with ICH9R intel controller.
It supports up to 6 drives in RAID 0.
One strange thing is that it has a strange option:
In the menu it says: "RAID 10 (0+1)" but in the description it says: "Mirrors and then stripes" for the very same option.
So, I wonder which one is it.
The machine has 4 320GB Hitachi drives, 1 500GB Seagate and 1 external 500GB WD Book2.
I have ~ 400GB of regular data with projects and project backups, different documentation documents and literature (pdf, doc, etc). Also I have like 500GB of static data that I use only on ocassions (ISOs, music, video) and I play some games
(Crysis e.g.).On the machine I do development itself which includes ~3-10 parallel applications open in the same time.
I do the development and compilation on the same machine.
What I most need is ultimate responsivness. I need as fast as possible loading of files, compilation (compilation is done very, very often like 5 times in 15 minutese on average) and as fast as possible application switching (alt-tab) so I guess I need a fast page file.
No matter what RAID I choose I will do manual backup on daily basis.
RAID can protect from hard drive failure, but not from any other error.
Also, I will daily backup the whole system image (full drive backup) so system restoration is not a problem at all.
The only thing in question is:
RAID 0 or RAID 10? (which I still don't know if is 0+1 or 1+0, but will test by pulling 1 then 2nd drive from system
).What best suits my needs and my style of work I've described up there.
Thank you for all advices and ideas!
RAID 10 is a composite RAID level. It consists of two sets of mirrors that are striped together. It can sustain two simultaneous hard disk failures as long as they're on different legs of the stripe. Minimum 4 drives.
As opposed to RAID 0+1 which is two stripes that are mirrored together. This requires 4 drives as well, though it can only sustain a single drive failure. RAID 10 would be recommended over RAID 0+1.
As for use on a standard workstation, unless you're concerned with data integrity, I would not recommend a RAID stripe at all. If you're concerned with data integrity, you'll want to use either RAID 5 or RAID 10 (or RAID 6 if it's supported). However, being that you're running this from your onboard controller, chances are that you will actually notice a decrease in disk performance.
As opposed to RAID 0+1 which is two stripes that are mirrored together. This requires 4 drives as well, though it can only sustain a single drive failure. RAID 10 would be recommended over RAID 0+1.
As for use on a standard workstation, unless you're concerned with data integrity, I would not recommend a RAID stripe at all. If you're concerned with data integrity, you'll want to use either RAID 5 or RAID 10 (or RAID 6 if it's supported). However, being that you're running this from your onboard controller, chances are that you will actually notice a decrease in disk performance.
I know how RAID work in both cases.
Well, I'm concerned with speed which, by my tests, is improved greately in RAID arrays (either 10 or 0, I've tested both).
Still, I'm a bit concerned with statement that RAID 0 could be actually slower than RAID 0+1...
Well, I'm concerned with speed which, by my tests, is improved greately in RAID arrays (either 10 or 0, I've tested both).
Still, I'm a bit concerned with statement that RAID 0 could be actually slower than RAID 0+1...
Being that you're using an integrated RAID controller, any RAID level is likely to be slower than a single disk solution.
Not only that, but unless you have a battery backup, you need to disable write caching...which degrades performance even more.
Your best bet is to buy a faster drive, rather than use a RAID. RAIDs are not meant to be used in workstation environments.
Not only that, but unless you have a battery backup, you need to disable write caching...which degrades performance even more.
Your best bet is to buy a faster drive, rather than use a RAID. RAIDs are not meant to be used in workstation environments.
Just thought I'd throw this in here, but generally the larger stripe sizes give you the best performances. Unless something is accessing tiny files all the time
MichaelD
Lifer
- Jan 16, 2001
- 31,528
- 3
- 76
Why would you say such a thing? I disagree completely. And...
So does HP.
And so does Dell.
Why would the two biggest workstation OEMs in world have options for some pretty pricey RAID setups if they weren't useful, wanted or necessary? These are not flashy gaming machines with dual GPUs and lots of LEDs; these are high-dollar scientific workstations designed for day-in, day-out number crunching and to have high-performance disk subsystems.
RAID is useful in many applications, workstations included. The OP has already stated he's not interested in automated data integrity (he'll do manual backups), only in speed. I love speed, but reloading from scratch is such a PITA. *shrug* It's his time he'll spend reloading.
Believe me; someone who spends $5K+ on a workstation for high-end apps such as FEA/data modeling/graphics design and such apps that take hours to generate results is very interested in keeping their data safe and accessible. So are the employers who shell out the bucks for such boxes.
Not everyone has an enterprise level SAN (or even another box) to back up data to. RAID is as common/needed/wanted in a professional workstation as any other component or feature.
Slower in what? random access? maybe. A single raptor will have better seek times because of its faster spindle speed. sequential file transfers? the raptor will lose in this test against two fast 7200rpm drives.
I use RAID0 in my workstations, simply because nothing really stays local... everything gets backed up to the servers every night. If a drive or the array dies, I grab some spare drives, image the os back, and its ready to go in a few hours. So, RAID10 will save you some downtime at the cost of more drives. A 4-drive RAID0 array is faster than a 4-drive RAID10 array, in my experience. RAID isn't a backup solution... its either used for speed or to minimize downtime with data redundancy (mirrored or striped).
postmortemIA
Diamond Member
- Jul 11, 2006
- 7,721
- 40
- 91
RAID0 helps with programming because some tools take forever to load... with drives being cheap i see no reason why not.
Just curious, what kind of software development do you do, and on what OS? I work on g++ and Linux all day.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 20K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter