Honor 9 Lite review
I will shortly obtain a new hard disc with the intention of implementing RAID.
The RAID controller is on the motherboard (MSI K8N Neo2 Plat). Both drives will be SATA2 but the motherboard only supports SATA1, therefore this step is principally being taken to improve performance.
I have a weekly scheduled backup regimen which uses Acronis to perform incremental backups to a third HDD dedicated to the task.
My question is whether I should opt for RAID 0 Striping, ignoring the potentially higher failure rate and relying on my backups for data security, or Raid 1 Mirroring. Which will provide a greater performance boost, and will it be any riskier than my current single disk setup ?
I am not worried about the loss of disc space as I have more than enough and then some.
Final question, will I need to take any special steps when recovering data from backups onto a RAID array, I am thinking in particular of RIAD drivers etc.
K8N Neo2 Plat, Athlon 64 3800+, 2GB DDR RAM, Windows XP Pro SP3.
Sorry but never heard of this sort of thing before!
Raid 1 Mirroring is more stable.
Yeah OK so I can't type !!
What I don't know is how much speed difference there is between mirroring and striping.
RAID 1 is probably quicker, but less stable.
My computer with it's [email protected] 250gb drives was setup to a RAID 0 configuration, me being advised this would improve performance etc etc.
Various other 'tecchies' locally have since remarked, for a home user this was not really necessary.
Keeping one drive for system and programs, the other partitioned for documents and backup would have been less problem in the future was their opinion.
I still have difficulty getting my head round how and what with this RAID configuration.
However, this Wikipedia article click here goes a long way to clear my head somewhat.
Hopefully it may be of use to you
You seem to have contradicted yourself, Brigadier.
If there isn't much in it. I will go for mirroring.
my understanding of raid is that if a drive fails you can replace it and it rebuilds the data to the new drive. so all great and data should be secure but any form of raid is slower than writing to just one drive as all drives have to finish wrting before the write operation can be completed. again when reading you have to read from more than one drive unless its mirrored. so best option for home i would think is one drive and one drive as as backup get a decent backup prog and set up up a schedual anything goes wrong and you just use your copy
Well 1 have opted for striped RAID0 and it has more or less doubled the disc throughput compared to the single drive. This has no data redundancy, but it is all backed up using Acronis anyway.
Just for info :
I have now tried both RAID0 (stripe) and RAID1 (mirror). As a reminder, I am using two SATA300 drives on a SATA150 controller.
The disk throughput for RAID0 was more or less doubled. The speed when loading games etc was noticeably improved, and Sandra benchmarking indicated a performance equivalent to SATA300 RAID and significantly higher than SATA300.
Interestingly, the Sandra benchmark comparisons show a fairly small difference between SATA150 RAID and SATA300 RAID arrays.
The disk throughout for RAID1 was slighly higher, but not dramatically so - more in keeping with a fast SATA300 drive.
I have had a few disk errors using RAID0, which I believe are the result of repeated forced "power button" shutdowns resulting from my other problem (see "Monitor goes to sleep" click here). In a couple of cases Windows recovered from a serious error with no apparent ill effects. I think I have that one pegged now (cross fingers) so I will try RAID0 again and see if it is stable.
"The disk throughout for RAID1 was slighly higher"
i.e. slightly higher than the single drive would have been.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.