Jump to content

Recommended Posts

ok,ive just got 2 f3 spin-points at 1tb each,looking at a raid 00 setup ,can someone explain the pro's and con's about this kind of config ,i know about the failure part but is there anything else i should know,

 

 

kind regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro: It can be slightly faster than having the drives as normal drives.

 

Con: You're playing the equivalent of Russian Roulette with your data. If a drive fails, you lose everything. If you're using an onboard RAID controller, and it fails, you probably will lose everything (unless you're bought a spare controller/motherboard). If you look at it the wrong way, you lose everything.

Edited by bilious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have 2 drives so you can only do RAID 0.

 

I use RAID 0 only for my O/S, hence I only use small drives and use the big ones as storage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You only have 2 drives so you can only do RAID 0.

 

I use RAID 0 only for my O/S, hence I only use small drives and use the big ones as storage.

He can do RAID 1.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go RAID 0, then you have 2TB but zero redundancy.

RAID 1 will give you 1TB but if one drive fails - you'll have something to fall back on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAID0 is best with small yet fast drives which are used for non-critical data such as your OS, programs, and games. 2TB in RAID0 seems excessive to me, and you'll have to be self-controlled to ensure your important data is always backed up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAID0 is best with small yet fast drives which are used for non-critical data such as your OS, programs, and games. 2TB in RAID0 seems excessive to me, and you'll have to be self-controlled to ensure your important data is always backed up.

And we know that won't happen!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

eh raid 0 been there done that... your better with 2 mechanical drives running self sufficiently IMO as SSD's are still a little pricey for things like running an OS or games folder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pros: None. Nothing at all.

 

Cons: Everything.

Pro: It can be slightly faster than having the drives as normal drives.

 

Con: You're playing the equivalent of Russian Roulette with your data. If a drive fails, you lose everything. If you're using an onboard RAID controller, and it fails, you probably will lose everything (unless you're bought a spare controller/motherboard). If you look at it the wrong way, you lose everything.

Brains that is a very passionate against opinion but I do not agree with their being no pros.

 

 

RAID 0 I assume you are referring to as their is no such thing as RAID 00.

Has great benefits as long as you understand how it works and its faults.

 

It is tiring seeing people bad mouth RAID 0 due to claims of data loss.

If your critical data is stored on a RAID 0 and it fails with no backups available, then you deserve to have data loss.

RAID is not a backup and should never take the place of backups.

 

RAID 0 can result in up to n times performance. Where n is the number of disks.

yes there are overheads that reduce this and with small files under the block size there is no benefit at all.

 

But for all files larger than the block size, which generally speaking is most, there are speed benefits.

 

 

Also regarding the size of the RAID 0 array. The higher the data density on each platter the better.

The higher the density the less distance the HDD head has to travel.

Also the more full a disk gets the speed drops of exponentially.

So storing 250GB on a 500GB HDD would degrade that setup more then the same 250GB on a 1TB drive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAID 0 I assume you are referring to as their is no such thing as RAID 00.

So, what would you call a stripeset of stripesets? Aside from a fucking bad idea?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RAID 0 I assume you are referring to as their is no such thing as RAID 00.

I'd assume you're wrong about that, so I stopped reading your post here.

 

Page 73 of this: http://manuals.info.apple.com/en/XserveRAID_UserGuide.pdf should sort you out.

 

RAID 0 I assume you are referring to as their is no such thing as RAID 00.

So, what would you call a stripeset of stripesets? Aside from a fucking bad idea?

 

But data loss isn't an issue with RAID0? WHY WOULD IT BE A BAD IDEA? Edited by brains

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also the more full a disk gets the speed drops of exponentially.

Hi.

 

For the most part, what you've said was fairly close to reality - but this one stands out. No. This isn't the case. I think what you may be making reference to is a concept in LUN boundary allocation and array parity contention when an array, with an array member group, or VDISK becomes close, or nears capacity fill point. In these scenarios, the overhead associated with a full array of 'userland' data vs the parity retrieval/extrieval on every write/read operation becomes detrimental to userland seek.

 

It's not a matter of a singular disk being an issue. This just isn't how it works. It's when an "array" as a whole, with defined LUN masks, borders, VDISKS and volumes becomes "full" that these problems make themselves apparent, not when a singular disk becomes "full".

 

/me skulks back to the z-storage-cave.

 

z

Edited by zebra

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

zebra i would kill for your knowledge

How are the carpet burns?

 

Didn't they supply you guys with knee pads though?

Weren't they stacked up in the server room against the wall? Could of sworn I saw them.

 

 

Oh no wait, they were mac books, sorry! :p

Edited by iamthemaxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Brains.

 

I attempted to be constructive so I do not understand why you are looking to sort me out?

 

Also I stand corrected on RAID00. Though I have not seen any reference to it aside from xserve RAID which I also own.

It could be that it is merely adding the extra stripe to bring them all together.

 

Does each bay on the xserve have its own RAID controller? That could be why is exists, to software RAID 0 the hardware RAID sets.

 

As for why you would chose 00 over 0 I could not understand why unless at each RAID level you used different block sizes?(correct my terminolgy if wrong). Do not conceptually see any performance difference with that. Perhaps zebra you may know?

Just after having a quick read through it conceptually looks as though RAID 00 results in the same as RAID0.

 

 

Also as mentioned RAID 0 should not be used for critical data and even if it was a RAID 1 or RAID 5, it should not take place of backup strategy.

Ideally to get the best of both worlds I would go 10 but I personally do not have the money or room in my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems pointless to both hardware and software RAID on the one platform to me.

Totally.

 

But going by the xserve RAID manual that is what it is. Looks like some mangled way of putting together a JBOD.

Only references I have seen to 00 are software RAID setups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did a bit of research on RAID 00 as it got my interest. After reading the XRAID manual, other forums, and talking to some of my suppliers.

 

It looks like it is a software level RAID level of abstraction that spans across multiple RAID hardware controllers bringing the multiple hardware abstraction levels into the one logical data block.

Guess bit like a JBOD but having spread the data across both hardware RAIDS ends up in a load balanced setup.

 

Looks like its an XRAID and linux setup. Hmm perhaps since XRAID is no more I do not think itd be a large stretch of the imagination to expect Promise to have implemented it as well?

 

Seems to be mostly used by creative studios using XRAID and needing huge single blocks of data for very large files like Maya, 3DS, Lightwave etc.

 

Interesting but I can't imagine many people finding a need for it. I would prefer a RAID 10. Best of both worlds.

 

I am getting a new RAID storage setup to replace our now failing XRAID which is out of warranty. Going to run RAID6 with a hot spare.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting but I can't imagine many people finding a need for it.

Heh, yeah. Thanks for the research though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×