• 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 setup, please help...

B

bound4h

n00b
Joined
Dec 14, 2004
Messages
9
I am setting up a RAID array, RAID 0, so I can have increased performance and storage. My question is this:

At this point in time, I have my Primary IDE controller hooked up to my current HDD as the master, of course. For my Secondary IDE controller I have it hooked up to my CDRW as the master, and my CDROM as the slave.

When I get this new HDD, do I need to hook it up to the slave controller on the Primary IDE connector? Or do I need to make it my Secondary IDE controller?

Quick diagram of current setup:

--------|
HDD |---master-----======= <- Primary IDE Controller on mobo
--------|

-----------|
CDRW |---master---------======= <- Secondary IDE Controller on mobo
-----------| |
|
------------| |
CDROM|---slave-----------|
------------|

Hopefully that makes sense. Another question: The red RAID cables, will one go into the back of one HDD, then the other HDD, then in the RAID controller on my mobo?

Thanks for any help you guys can provide.

Mike


--------------------

Asus SK8V K8T800
AMD Athlon FX-53 2.4GHz 940-pin
OCZ 1GB PC3200 DDR400 Registered/ECC
GeForce 6800 GT
120GB HDD@7200rpm
Enermax EG495P-SFMA
48x CD-R/RW
52X CD-ROM
 
According to Newegg your board has a onboard SATA Raid contoller:

Onboard SATA/RAID: VIA VT8237, 2x SATA, RAID 0/1; Promise R20378, 2x SATA, RAID 0/1/0+1

This being said you need to have a SATA HDD or a IDE TO SATA adapter for your current IDE drive. Also, I am not a RAID expert but I beleive you need two similar or exact size HDD's for data striping to work. I dont think you can get away with one HDD and two partitions.

Good Luck!
 
That being said, would it be better to have two SATA, IDE, or SCSI drives in RAID 0? What are the advantages and disadvantages?

Thanks.
 
2 sata raptors if you are going to do it.

I have heard that raid 0 on normal ide or sata srives just isn't worth it. (thats just what I heard) I had raid 0 on my KG7 Raid board with two 60 gig ibm drives and the raid sucked, I prolly didn't set it up right and I think I didn't set the cluster size to the "best" size but nonetheless I think I managed to make a raid 0 setup slower than a normal 7200 rpm drive.

I Have heard that 2 sata raptors are the best for raid 0 $304.00 for two of em though.

totalling 148 GB
 
I have a SCSI RAID configuration but the principle is the same.

Like guito13 said, the drives being used to build a RAID 0 array *SHOULD* be the same. You could use a 250GB IDE drive as #1 and a 70GB IDE drive as #2 but then your first drive will only use 70GB out of the 250GB (you'd lose 180GB). It's best to use the exact same drive for each part of your array because you start to run into problems if one drive xfers data at a substantial different rate than the other drive....in a nut shell, get two of the same drives.

And guito13 is right again with the need for an adapter from IDE to SATA.
 
You have a nice board but to make the SCSI option pay off for you in terms of performance you'd need a 64-bit PCI-X slot (which means new board). You'll get good performance with your SATA RAID. I just upgraded my Adaptec 2110S SCSI RAID single channgel 32MB (?) to an Adaptec SCSI RAID 2230SLP (dual channel with 256MB) and the drives too, and it's blazing fast. But that sort of performance comes with a heavy price tag - I paid $557 for the controller and each HDD is roughly $300...multiply that by 5 drives and the total is close to $2060. So you get what you pay for. SATA RAID is fast. If you already have it "in progress", then stick with it.
 
awsiemieniec said:
I have a SCSI RAID configuration but the principle is the same.
Click to expand...

If i could get my damn proliant 6000 working i would have 3 raid 5 arrays (6 disks per array) of uber data

....damn overpriced propierity parts .....
 
I am just going to point out the usual stuff:
You are most likely to get better performance with two independent, well configured (as in laid out) disk than from RAID 0. By using the two spindels independently, you can decrease the average access time. For example, putting the OS on one drive and your game files on the second one will improve concurrent access. In addition, if one disk fries, one 1/2 of your data is gone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top