- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 13,394
I've got 4x 5400 RPM 40GB HDDs. They're slow, they're old, and they heat up like a sonnabitch. The machine that they're connected to does two things: Folding@Home and file serving (via Windows XP's built in "file sharing" service). It's used to store a large number of 100-300MB video files, which are streamed out one at a time to my laptop via 802.11B.
Previously, I used each drive independantly (No RAID, is this JBOD?) and ended up losing a good 2-3GB per drive due to my file storage method (Storing 20 videos per folder, for example. If I couldn't fit all 20, throw em on the next drive).I've heard nothing but bad things about RAID-0. As the machine is Windows XP, and my attempt at following Tom's Hardware's Guide to setting up RAID-5 failed, I set it up in a RAID-0 set up. I like the fact that it's read as a single drive.
Should I stop using RAID-0? Should I just suck it up and ignore the 2-3GB loss per drive? Am I an idiot for going with a method that could easily lose my data?
Edit: I should mention that the RAID-0 setup is software-based. I don't have a controller for it. And no, I can't really afford to buy one.
Previously, I used each drive independantly (No RAID, is this JBOD?) and ended up losing a good 2-3GB per drive due to my file storage method (Storing 20 videos per folder, for example. If I couldn't fit all 20, throw em on the next drive).I've heard nothing but bad things about RAID-0. As the machine is Windows XP, and my attempt at following Tom's Hardware's Guide to setting up RAID-5 failed, I set it up in a RAID-0 set up. I like the fact that it's read as a single drive.
Should I stop using RAID-0? Should I just suck it up and ignore the 2-3GB loss per drive? Am I an idiot for going with a method that could easily lose my data?
Edit: I should mention that the RAID-0 setup is software-based. I don't have a controller for it. And no, I can't really afford to buy one.