• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

raid 0 partioning ?

R

rj2

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 13, 2004
Messages
166
hello.new to raid,getting ready to install xp on a raid 0 on seagate sata drives.on previous drive i would partition the drive with os seperate from apps, games etc.
is there a general concensus on whether or not a raid drive should be partitoned
thanks
 
most people seem to argue that partitioning is generally a bad idea, since it increases the seek time. The reasoning goes that the OS is generally smart to write files to a HDD sequentially, thereby filling the HDD from the outside in. Since the files are "dense" the head only need to travel (on average) 1/2 * distance from start of data to end. In a partitioned scenario, since there is freespace between the end of partition one and the beginning of partition two, the average seek distance will be higher.

This doesn't matter anymore, once the disk is full, but for disks that have little data on them, the difference could be significant, depending on applications and load patterns.
 
If you can ever imagine yourself reinstalling windows, then I would recommend creating at least one other partition. Just nice for movies, music, etc, not having to back them up separately just to do a reinstall or clean install.
 
thanks for replies.i will maybe try 2 partitions,1 for os 1 for everything else.see how that works.
i plan on backing everything up every couple weeks using ghost
 
You should consider not using RAID 0 with partitions, but instead of using the drives with no array and using one for C:\ and one for D:\
 
Met-AL said:
You should consider not using RAID 0 with partitions, but instead of using the drives with no array and using one for C:\ and one for D:\
Click to expand...
then that kind of defeats the purpose of me wanting to try raid out then does`nt it?that is how i presently have things setup
 
rj2 said:
then that kind of defeats the purpose of me wanting to try raid out then does`nt it?that is how i presently have things setup
Click to expand...

yup.. don't worry.. alot of people on here seem to really not like RAID 0.. I've been running RAID 0 for a month or so now and no problems with it.. but you gotta remember, if something happens to one of the drives, you lose everything. (had to throw that in there for the RAID 0 haters :D )
 
rj2 said:
then that kind of defeats the purpose of me wanting to try raid out then does`nt it?that is how i presently have things setup
Click to expand...

Well partitioning a RAID 0 array kind of defeats the purpose of RAID 0 doesn't it?
 
Danith said:
yup.. don't worry.. alot of people on here seem to really not like RAID 0..
Click to expand...
It's not like people on here don't like it, but that thread always go the same way:
OP "will RAID-0 benefit me?"

"depends on the application"

OP "gaming and OS loading"

"It's hard to make a definite statement here. On the one hand, there's this thread, on the other hand there's this post in thread over at SR. Depending on whom you believe either RAID-0 is more than 2x as fast as a single drive, or you are better off buying a single, larger and newer disk. Since it is currently not possible to replicate the results from SR and nobody -to my knowledge- has replicated the OC-Forum's results either, it's your choice. I would advise against it, because I consider the increased data loss probability as a deal breaker, considering that I believe that there is virtually no benefit for the casual gamer. I would suggest a multi-disk solution that loads your games off a seperate drive from your OS, possibly reducing seek time..."

"I have been running RAID-0 for [some number] years now and it's like night and day. I have never had a HDD fail on me. RAID-0 is great and so much faster than a single disk."

well maybe i should run RAID-0 then.

"Which benchmarks did you run on your RAID-0 array?"

[image of HDTach showing really high STRs] And I feel that it is faster. WinXP startup takes me only xx seconds.

that settles it, I am running RAID-0.

...

Danith said:
I've been running RAID 0 for a month or so now and no problems with it.. but you gotta remember, if something happens to one of the drives, you lose everything. (had to throw that in there for the RAID 0 haters :D )
Click to expand...
So what is your personal take on it? Is it really faster?
 
My HDD/RAID/Backup setup...

2 74GB 16mb Raptors RAID0
2 Partitions
C:\ - - OS, Apps, Games
D:\ - - All of my static data (Pics, music, vids, utilities etc.(Nothing "installed"))

1 WD 250GB 16mb SATAII
2 or more partitions
E:\ - - Backups of D:\ on an off-peak routine schedule
F:\ - - Dual boot Vista

E:\ is then backed up through my home network to another box routinely.


So, in this case, partitioning is perfectly fine. The heads won't be suffering from seek degradation as all installed apps and OS are on the same partition.

Also, the RAID0 array has a full backup routine so very little to no data can be lost in some catastophic event. And if the box catches on fire or the PSU spikes everything, I will have backups externally on the ready.

WERD.
 
ty Brahmzy for your reply.i am going to give it a try partitioning it in the way you have it laid out
thanks
 
I would not recommend partitioning ur RAID. I used to always partition my main drive, but when I went to RAID I gave that up. I keep my OS and games installed on my RAID )'d Raptors and all my personal stuff on a 2nd drive (ie music, docs, pics, etc.), then I have my movies on a high capacity drive.

The reason I say it doesn't make sense to partition it, is it really doesn't provide you any greater peace of mind. If one drive fails, u still loose everything. I would not keep anything on a RAID 0 partition you will miss if the RAID fails.
 
it is certainly confusing when you are just starting to learn about new
things on computers,that one has`nt done before.
does it become an issue when you have to defrag such large drives?
i would cringe at the thought of having to defrag 100 + gigs at a time
 
That all depends on how often you defrag and how much writing you do to your disk.

If you let it go for a month and are constantly copying and writing to your hard drive, you may be in for an overnight defrag session.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top