SATA Drives, non RAID

[John Hollingsworth]

RAID 1 does NOT take the place of backup. RAID 0 is fast but
anti-reliable.
Using D: as an independent drive(JBOD) and then putting Ghost images is
a
fair kind of backup. Much better would be to put D: drive into a
removable
shock-mount tray like KingWin KF-83 (~$30) and turn it off and better
yet
keep it in the car while not in use.

I get your point, thanks. As well as the C: Ghosts to D:, I currently also
backup all data from D: to my #2 PC every hour using Second Copy. I take
your point completely about the external disk etc. as I did at work, but
for home use there is a limit.

Thanks

John

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.

 

[John Hollingsworth]

I've just ordered an A8V board and 2 x 160GB SATA drives.

If I want to use them as straight forward C: and D: drives, which is
the best method to do this?

Thanks.

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.

Thanks everyone for your most helpful comments. Although there is some
disagreement around, the points raised have increased my understanding and
shown me what to look for.

I intend to build the system, try RAID-1 and also plain C: and D: and see
what happens with perhaps just Photoshop loaded. I'll then decide which is
best and do a full load.

At present, I suspect I will end up with my current type of system. I
should have mentioned I back up data to my #2 PC every hour.

Thanks again

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.

 

[Ron Reaugh]

I get your point, thanks. As well as the C: Ghosts to D:, I currently also
backup all data from D: to my #2 PC every hour using Second Copy. I take
your point completely about the external disk etc. as I did at work, but
for home use there is a limit.

There shouldn't be regarding backup.

 

[John Hollingsworth]

There shouldn't be regarding backup.

True - can't dispute your point

John

Please remove "NO-SPAM" if sending email.

 

[Milleron]

Nope, there's a wide range of users that see significant noticable
improvement from RAID 0 not the least of which are desktop video folks.


Nope, the chance of the failure of a RAID 0 array with two drives is about
double that of a single drive. In a RAID 0 array the chances of any drive
failing remains unchanged.

Inasmuch as a RAID 0 array does the job that a single disc would be
doing otherwise, I think you just said what I said, didn't you??

Ron

 

[Ron Reaugh]

Inasmuch as a RAID 0 array does the job that a single disc would be
doing otherwise, I think you just said what I said, didn't you??

Not exactly which is why I posted a very precise statement on the issue.

 

[Milleron]

Software RAID-1 under Solaris (i.e. DiskSuite) uses round-robin reads
to the drives in the array; the read performance a RAID-1 on an MSI
motherboard at work (Promise RAID controller, I think) was substantially
better than with a single drive, so I assume it uses a similar arrangement.
This only applies to reads (in particular sequential reads) - writes have
to go to both drives, and would be slightly worse than a single drive due
to the RAID overheads.

I stand corrected! Thanks very much for the explanation.
Ron