mc_ram

Is RAID necessary?

RAID 0:
RAID level 0 refers to striping data across multiple disks without any redundant information.
Striping can be used to enhance performance in either a request rate intensive or transfer rate intensive environment. Unfortunately. Striping reduces the level of data availability since a disk failure will cause the entire array to be inaccessible.

What are the chances disk will fail? (i will have HD cooling) Will it dramatically speed up transfer/request rate? ie. 2 x 10,000RPM HD = 20,000 RPM?

RAID 1:
RAID level 1 refers to maintaining duplicate sets of all data on separate disk drives. Of the RAID levels, level 1 provides the highest data availability since two complete copies of all information are maintained. If one of your hard drives fail, you will have an exact copy of all your data on your other hard drive, meaning that you can carry on working as normal without having to restore lost files. You could see it as having a permanent automatic back-up of all your data. Even if one hard drive fails, you can then use the other hard drive to create a new RAID array and so in theory (unless you have an electrical surge, or both hard drives fail simultaneously) you can never be caught out when you turn on your computer one day to find that your hard drive has failed, because you always have a backup.

Will RAID 1 be equal/faster/slower performance than RAID 0?
Is RAID 1 just for people who are cautiuos about data?



All i am after is fast transfer/request rates.
Also, is RAID relatively hard to set-up?
Thanks (too many questions lol)

PanamaGal

Adequate cooling does help keep a drive alive longer. But any disk is subject to mechanical failure. I don't know the actual percentages, but I would think they are not that high. In theory, RAID 0 is supposed to increase the sequential transfer rate, though not double it. However, in most real-world applications, performance gain is mostly negligible (no more than 10-15 percent gain max), certainly not enough in most apps to justify the cost of the second hard drive. Editing of music and video files will offer best chance for noticeable gain in RAID 0. Your data does become significantly more at risk with RAID 0 as failure of either drive will cause loss of all data on the entire array. You'll likely not notice any change in performance with RAID 1 versus no RAID, and little to none from RAID 0. Yes, RAID 1 is primarily a data backup tool.

mc_ram

is RAID hard to set-up?
should i get SATA or IDE for RAID?

i decided il have RAID 0

PanamaGal

It's not hard to set up. Motherboard manuals usually give a decent explanation, if the RAID is built into the board. Otherwise, the controller manufacturer usually gives good instructions. Of course, any problems or specific questions can be asked here in TSF. IDE or SATA really doesn't matter. If you haven't purchased yet, might as well go SATA.

mc_ram

whats the main difference?
I see sata is more expensive, whats the advantages?

PanamaGal

SATA drives really shouldn't be any more expensive than IDE, and a few sites that I have checked out recently actually have same size/speed/cache SATA drives a dollar to a few dollars cheaper than IDE. SATA has more bandwidth than IDE, although right now given the current state of technology, the real-world noticeable difference is very slight. It has better integrity of connectivity by providing error-checking capability, it is hot swappable, and perhaps best right now, the cables are much smaller which allow for better airflow inside the case, and the cables can be much longer, if needed, than IDE without causing impediment.

mc_ram

Thanks, very helpful :)