RAID Question

KAJohnston · 10-23-2009, 09:19 AM

I want to build a new system using the MB in a RAID-5 configuration. Currently I have a 2 drives in my current PC 1 TB each, not is any RAID.
I am going to build my new PC with a RAID-5 configuration (3 new drives). After my build is complete move the data to from my old PC to my new PC. Then add the two drives from my old PC to my new PC. In the end I would have a RAID-5 configuration in my new PC with 5 drives.

Thanks

FreeNerd · 10-23-2009, 09:42 AM

What is the reason for using RAID 5? While RAID 5 offers more space than RAID 1 the math involved in RAID 5 comes at a performance price not to mention fault tolerance on RAID 5 is not as good as RAID 1 or RAID 10.

I would get 4 drives and run RAID 10 if it was me.

http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/raid5-...rformance.html

There is a chart down a bit on this link where he discusses 3 drive RAID 5 vs. 4 drive RAID 10, check out that chart.

I only recommend running RAID 5 for non I/O intensive data storage. I would not recommend it for an OS install.

FreeNerd · 10-23-2009, 09:45 AM

Actually, if it was me, I would not run RAID at all.

I have 2 500GB drives that the original intention was to RAID, they are now setup to dual boot my PC to Vista or 7 depending on what I need or want to do that day.

Get a fast drive for your OS, and RAID your data storage drives. If you don't have a high end RAID card, the onboard RAID chipsets of most motherboards are not true hardware RAID and don't provide the true RAID performance benefit of the high dollar cards.

**raptor_pa** · 10-23-2009, 09:55 AM

Exactly as Freenerd explained, most MoBo chipsets still use the CPU to handle the raid, higher end raid cards have ther own MCU to handle RAID functions, removing that load from the system CPU. Raid5's parity calcs are a definite performance hit. Also, understand RAID is NOT as ubstitute for backing up, it's purpose is to allow a system to continue to function with a failed drive, albeit at a reduced level of performance. Logical errors or file system corruption which are still probably the greatest source of data loss will trash any raid, the only protection from RAID is from actual physical failure of a disk.

KAJohnston · 10-23-2009, 03:36 PM

Thanks for all the replies,

This is going to be for data storage and not for the OS. On that note, was looking at having a RAID-1 for the OS and RAID-5 for Data storage. I should of clarified.

My reasons to have RAID-5 was for fault tolerance and more storage without the high price of RAID-1 for my storage.

As far as CPU usage for the RADI usage, I guessing a RADI card would be better for my storage?

Any information on hardware that would work for this type of setup?

Thanks agian

10-23-2009, 09:19 AM	#1 (permalink)
KAJohnston Registered User Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 2 OS: Vista 64	RAID Question I want to build a new system using the MB in a RAID-5 configuration. Currently I have a 2 drives in my current PC 1 TB each, not is any RAID. I am going to build my new PC with a RAID-5 configuration (3 new drives). After my build is complete move the data to from my old PC to my new PC. Then add the two drives from my old PC to my new PC. In the end I would have a RAID-5 configuration in my new PC with 5 drives. Thanks

10-23-2009, 09:42 AM	#2 (permalink)
FreeNerd Registered User Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 238 OS: Windows 7/Vista/XP	Re: RAID Question What is the reason for using RAID 5? While RAID 5 offers more space than RAID 1 the math involved in RAID 5 comes at a performance price not to mention fault tolerance on RAID 5 is not as good as RAID 1 or RAID 10. I would get 4 drives and run RAID 10 if it was me. http://www.cyberciti.biz/tips/raid5-...rformance.html There is a chart down a bit on this link where he discusses 3 drive RAID 5 vs. 4 drive RAID 10, check out that chart. I only recommend running RAID 5 for non I/O intensive data storage. I would not recommend it for an OS install. __________________ “Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing” ~ Aristotle

10-23-2009, 09:45 AM	#3 (permalink)
FreeNerd Registered User Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Denver, CO Posts: 238 OS: Windows 7/Vista/XP	Re: RAID Question Actually, if it was me, I would not run RAID at all. I have 2 500GB drives that the original intention was to RAID, they are now setup to dual boot my PC to Vista or 7 depending on what I need or want to do that day. Get a fast drive for your OS, and RAID your data storage drives. If you don't have a high end RAID card, the onboard RAID chipsets of most motherboards are not true hardware RAID and don't provide the true RAID performance benefit of the high dollar cards. __________________ “Criticism is something we can avoid easily by saying nothing, doing nothing, and being nothing” ~ Aristotle

10-23-2009, 09:55 AM	#4 (permalink)
raptor_pa Mod Hardware Team Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Central PA Posts: 4,841 OS: XP	Re: RAID Question Exactly as Freenerd explained, most MoBo chipsets still use the CPU to handle the raid, higher end raid cards have ther own MCU to handle RAID functions, removing that load from the system CPU. Raid5's parity calcs are a definite performance hit. Also, understand RAID is NOT as ubstitute for backing up, it's purpose is to allow a system to continue to function with a failed drive, albeit at a reduced level of performance. Logical errors or file system corruption which are still probably the greatest source of data loss will trash any raid, the only protection from RAID is from actual physical failure of a disk. __________________

10-23-2009, 03:36 PM	#5 (permalink)
KAJohnston Registered User Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 2 OS: Vista 64	Re: RAID Question Thanks for all the replies, This is going to be for data storage and not for the OS. On that note, was looking at having a RAID-1 for the OS and RAID-5 for Data storage. I should of clarified. My reasons to have RAID-5 was for fault tolerance and more storage without the high price of RAID-1 for my storage. As far as CPU usage for the RADI usage, I guessing a RADI card would be better for my storage? Any information on hardware that would work for this type of setup? Thanks agian