bit-tech.net

Understanding RAID

Comments 1 to 25 of 46

Reply
DarkLord7854 11th June 2007, 05:46 Quote
Was long reading, but well worth it. Good job :D
Tyinsar 11th June 2007, 05:51 Quote
Well, I wasn't mystified by RAID - though I once looked forward to having a RAID 5 array - when I had only a single 80MB SCSI drive and started reading about computers. Actually I'd still be interested in RAID 5 if the cost for a decent controller wasn't so ridiculous.

Anyway - good article - hopefully it stops a few more people from putting valuable data on a RAID 0 or JBOD array.
zhangmaster12 11th June 2007, 06:18 Quote
really great "demystifier" demystified raid 4 me. thanks
Firehed 11th June 2007, 06:31 Quote
Always wondered somewhat what RAID3 and RAID4 were, not that I ever really cared ;) Good read - I like these recent storage-esque articles, like the recent DIY home server one as well. Partly because I'm in the market, and partly because there's a distinct increasing need for stuff like that in the home for media whores like myself. Keep up the good work!
fungry 11th June 2007, 06:35 Quote
excellent article. i consider myself a total RAID amatuer. the only thing that was shockingly confusing for my head was that exclusive OR thing. haha!

good stuff!
ZERO <ibis> 11th June 2007, 06:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyinsar
Well, I wasn't mystified by RAID - though I once looked forward to having a RAID 5 array - when I had only a single 80MB SCSI drive and started reading about computers. Actually I'd still be interested in RAID 5 if the cost for a decent controller wasn't so ridiculous.

Anyway - good article - hopefully it stops a few more people from putting valuable data on a RAID 0 or JBOD array.

I got my card for like $200 something a few years ago it even has expandable memory(got like 512mb in there right now). I will say that it is definitely worth it, I previously had a RAID 0 and after it failed I never wanted to lose my data again so I got 3 WD Rapters in a raid 5. It has run great for years and I never turn off this computer. I do however need more drives...

Hopefully I can save up for a 1TB :'(
DougEdey 11th June 2007, 07:14 Quote
Knew you'd get Tad to write it ;)
r4tch3t 11th June 2007, 07:26 Quote
Quote:
While you may not save hours, loading a map in Battlefield 2142 that few seconds quicker may make the difference of you nabbing the before anyone else gets to it!
The wha???
Quote:
One thing RAID1 should not be considered for is backups.

Filled me in on a few things, like RAID 3 and 4 and RAID 1 only supporting 2 drives, I thought it could be more, like having two redundant drives.
DLoney 11th June 2007, 08:23 Quote
Great Read. Thanks.
Mister_Tad 11th June 2007, 08:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
Thought you'd get Tad to write it ;)


I kinda did :?
DougEdey 11th June 2007, 08:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister_Tad
I kinda did :?

I know, meant to write "Knew" altered to save you confuzling.
Mister_Tad 11th June 2007, 08:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DougEdey
I know, meant to write "Knew" altered to save you confuzling.

Ok, I get it...
I have yet to have my coffee, these things happen
Delphium 11th June 2007, 08:55 Quote
Nice article, just as my own raid card dies in 2tb raid 3 mode :( I can think of replacing it with something better.

I had also come across this page which shows quite nicely the differences between raids with some animation. http://www.acnc.com/04_01_00.html

Incidently if anyone can recomend a raid card that is known to work with vista, I would be happy to hear from you.
(something like 5-8port, sata-II, pci/pci-e)
Glider 11th June 2007, 09:32 Quote
Great article, but I do miss some examples of RAID implementations (like some good HW cards, Soft vs Hardware RAID [I think Linux here ;)]),...

But nothing is perfect, and there's allways something somebody wants added :)
revlob 11th June 2007, 09:35 Quote
Great article, but it would have been even better with some pointers on dedicated RAID controllers.
DougEdey 11th June 2007, 09:37 Quote
The article is called "Understanding RAID" not "Implementing RAID"
DarkReaper 11th June 2007, 10:57 Quote
Sequel plzkthx?
Edvuld 11th June 2007, 11:58 Quote
I think that RAID1 isn't really a good security measure. Just because you got such an array set up doesn't mean that your data is safe. An external HDD that is unplugged from the computer when not used is way more secure.

From my experience, what has caused most data loss is HDD corruption either caused by bad drivers or Windows. RAID1 won't protect you against any of these :(

Nor will it protect you from lightning strikes, Viruses or Hackers. It will only protect you against a drive failure. I'm sure most readers are aware of this, but just in case someone's thinking about using RAID1, keep it in mind, so you don't stand there with your beard in the mailbox when your computer has catched on fire :p
Glider 11th June 2007, 12:01 Quote
Edvuld, you are talking backups... RAID isn't backup... RAID is protection against Harddrive failure... Safe data is data on redundant array + a good Backup routine.
Hugo 11th June 2007, 12:34 Quote
No, safe data is a redundant array, backups to a seperate location to the main data, furthur backups to yet another seperate site locked in a fire, bomb, radiation and magnetism (including EMP's) proof safe.

Even then I'd still worry ;)

Still, useful article! As it happens I had a RAID5 array fail the other day, it does happen - it helps if you actually pay attention to those "one of your disks has failed" warnings and change it before disk number 2 dies...
Nature 11th June 2007, 14:09 Quote
What a beautiful article. I'm reccomending this to everyone I know who cares, keep it posted bit-tech...
./^\.Ace./^\. 11th June 2007, 14:18 Quote
Is raid really worth it :? I only have 2 hard drives, a Maxtor 80GB ATA and a Maxtor 120GB S-ATA 1 (150Mb/s) :'( would it be a good idea to raid them or leave them as two diferent drives :?
Glider 11th June 2007, 14:27 Quote
Well, you'll lose quite a lot in raiding them... RAID requires identical partitions (for obvious reasons). So that 120GB will be used for 80GB. And the only thing that is kind of sensible that you can with 2 drives is RAID1, which is (IMHO at home) unneeded if you have a somewhat decent backup plan.
Hugo 11th June 2007, 15:05 Quote
Sensible allocation of data between the drives them will do more for you than RAID would.
Omnituens 11th June 2007, 16:08 Quote
great read, very well written
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums