RAID 1 questions.

[CoW]8(0)]

Well since I have two 160GB hard drives (one SATA, the other PATA) I've decided that a RAID 1 setup would be best. 160GB is more than enough storage for me and I feel it's a waste leaving one drive empty all the time.

But I have a few questions regarding RAID 1.

Would I have to erase both drives to setup this configuration? Because my 160GB PATA drive currently contains all my files and OS.

What would be the disadvantages of a RAID 1 configuration? CPU/resource hogging?

 

[drizzt81]

RAID-1 should not erase your data, but it depends on your controller and whether you select the right disk for the source.

Depending on the RAID-1 implementation, you write access times may suffer. The increase in CPU overhead should be negligible, but it depends on the RAID implementaion/ driver.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well according to my Nvidia Raid manual, in order to have a bootable NVRAID array setup I need to reinstall a new copy of windows. Is this the only way?

I'm looking for a way to implement RAID without losing the data on my drive.

 

[drizzt81]

there may be a different way, but how difficult or complex that is, I do not know. To my understanding, Windows will require a different driver when moving from a single-drive to a RAID-array. Additionally, it is possible that the boot.ini would need to be changed.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well conceptually speaking, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary to reinstall everything from scratch to do a RAID setup. This should be especially true when mirroring the data in a RAID 1 setup.

Perhaps the RAID design just isn't well implmented?

 

[drizzt81]

Well conceptually speaking, it doesn't seem like it would be necessary to reinstall everything from scratch to do a RAID setup. This should be especially true when mirroring the data in a RAID 1 setup.

Perhaps the RAID design just isn't well implmented?

the problem is likely the driver moreso than the HW implementation. I remember that there was no need to copy the data when creating a mirror on my old highpoint controller. The problem comes from the fact that you are "moving" the WinXP install, which may be a problem, since a different driver may required to read from the Raid array.

Bottom line: If you don't want to reinstall and don't have a backup and the manual says that you'll need to reinstall, then it's likely that you will have to do that.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Is the only benefit of RAID 1 data redundency? Because I can't find any performance advantages to it...

 

[EnderW]

Is the only benefit of RAID 1 data redundency?

yes

 

[unhappy_mage]

Is the only benefit of RAID 1 data redundency? Because I can't find any performance advantages to it...

Especially if you're using an onboard controller, you should assume that the only benefit is redundancy. High-end or well-done controllers can get better performance by servicing more than one request at once, but your average consumer board is likely to have taken the easy way out and fulfill requests from only one disk at once.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well having only two hard dishs, I guess my only option is to go to RAID 0 for the performance benefit.

 

[drizzt81]

If I may ask: What is the goal of this endeavor?

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well I was orginally hoping to increase disk perfromance without the risk of RAID 0. But I don't think I have that option with only two hard drives....

 

[drizzt81]

for what application would this be? there are times when using two disk independently will provide a greater benefit than the RAID-0 shotgun approach.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well I'm hoping to see the benefit in game loading times.

 

[drizzt81]

you may be able to get an improvement if you install the games on a drive that is not occupied by the OS.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

But is that only assuming the disk with the OS becomes fragmented?

 

[drizzt81]

But is that only assuming the disk with the OS becomes fragmented?

No. Apart from that, trying this should me easier and faster than getting your OS installed on RAID-1

 

[CoW]8(0)]

Well it should definetly be easier, but would it be faster than RAID 0?

 

[drizzt81]

Well it should definetly be easier, but would it be faster than RAID 0?

the problems is that there is no benchmark to show this. Nobody has tried to compare this yet, because it is rather difficult to do. Why don't you try it? A stopwatch should be sufficient.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

But why would there be a speed increase aside from less framentation if I stored games on a separate drive?

 

[drizzt81]

less head movement if there is OS activity at the same time, such as paging etc.
ex: If you have IE open and the cache gets written while you load, the head will move a lot. Additionally, since the game will be stored further towards the edge of the drive, the STR will be higher as well.

 

[general]

I would first install the nVidia RAID driver before you start using RAID. Then move all of your data onto one disc. Then use some sort of dos utility (you cna probably find one from your hard drive manufacturer) and use it to copy the image of one drive (the full one) to the other. Since they're perfectly mirrored, nVRAID should pick it up just fine and it might boot. Remember though, this is all hypothetical so don't blame me if it loses all of your data. Your best bet is probably find an external USB drive and backup your image onto that and then make your raid and load onto it that way. The first way might work adn probably won't lose data but no guarantees.

 

[CoW]8(0)]

less head movement if there is OS activity at the same time, such as paging etc.
ex: If you have IE open and the cache gets written while you load, the head will move a lot. Additionally, since the game will be stored further towards the edge of the drive, the STR will be higher as well.

So wouldn't this only be a benefit if I installed all my games at once and did not install any new patches etc? Because any modification later on of those files would cause them be scattered throughout the drive.

 

[drizzt81]

well should fragementation become a problem, you can always run a defragger.