RAID0 question

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sumer Yamaner
  • Start date Start date
S

Sumer Yamaner

I am running Vista Home Premium with a single HDD. My motherboard supports
RAID configurations. To use a RAID0 configuration I have to install Vista
again. Right? Is there a way to use the existing Vista setup without
reinstallation?
Another question is: Does Vista setup recognize my RAID0 setup during
installation if I make the necessarry adjustments in the motherboard BIOS?
Do I need a third party driver before proceeding with Vista installation?
Thanks.

Sumer Yamaner
 
RAID 0 is not worth the effort. You will see a slight improvemant in
read/write speeds. All it does is stripe everything over 2 or more Disks.
What that means is that you have part of a file on one drive and part of the
same file on another. In case of one drive failing, you have lost the lot.

RAID 1 is better, as it makes a mirror copy of everything that is one the
first Disk. The complete file is written to the one place, and a copy made to
the other drive.
 
OK I know these technical details and I always use multiple backups of my
data. What I need is an increase in HDD performance. I think RAID0 is the
simplest way to do it.
I just want to know technical details on how to do it.
Thanks for the advice.
 
Sumer Yamaner said:
OK I know these technical details and I always use multiple backups of my
data. What I need is an increase in HDD performance. I think RAID0 is the
simplest way to do it.
I just want to know technical details on how to do it.
Thanks for the advice.
I prefer to install two internal drives and rely on plug in drives for
back-up/expansion. Raid is of mixed blessing.
 
Thank you for all the replies but I don't want to know whether RAID0 is a
good alternative, what I want to know is exactly HOW TO DO IT.
Thanks again...
 
You will need to re-install Vista if you RAID the system drive in your BIOS.
You may need a driver disk (external media) if the chipset is not known by
the OS on install. (Intel P965 or newer Nforces will require it).

Vista sees the drives as a single HDD with all the normal options. You can
manage the drives withing the OS with a chipset utility if the driver owner
provide one.

Short, but I hope this helps.

....

Al
 
What I need is an increase in HDD performance. I think RAID0 is the
simplest way to do it.

The RAID controller built into most motherboards is often a poor
performance device and more for marketing. I bet you would not see a
significant increase in performance, at least no enough to make it worth
doing.

Get a real RAID Card, one with 128MB or 256MB of onboard memory, then
you'll see a performance increase - just make sure the card is a PCIe or
PCIx type card.

--

Leythos
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
- Calling an illegal alien an "undocumented worker" is like calling a
drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist"
(e-mail address removed) (remove 999 for proper email address)
 
Sumer Yamaner said:
Thank you for all the replies but I don't want to know whether RAID0 is a
good alternative, what I want to know is exactly HOW TO DO IT.
Thanks again...


There is no step by step answer as there are too many variables. Are you
using hardware or software RAID? What hard drive controller are you using?
It sounds like you are using an onboard RAID controller on your motherboard.
If this is the case then yes, you will need a Vista driver for this
controller. And yes, you will have to reinstall Vista as creating a RAID 0
array will erase everything on the current drive. RAID 0 has no redundancy
so it can't be created on the fly.

As many people have pointed out. RAID 0 is not worth the effort in most
cases. You are greatly increasing your odds of data loss at some point for a
minimal speed increase. There are probably much safer ways to increase the
speed of your computer.
 
You could try backing up your current HD with Acronis true image, then
create the new HD (raid0) and then use acronis to restore the image to the
new HD.

Acronis isn't free but willl probably work in your instance.

Good luck,

Jeff
 
OK I know these technical details and I always use multiple backups of my
data. What I need is an increase in HDD performance. I think RAID0 is the
simplest way to do it.
I just want to know technical details on how to do it.
Thanks for the advice.


Yes, if you set up a RAID0 array, you lose everything on the drive,
and will have to reinstall Vista from scratch. Exactly how to set up
RAID0 depends on your hardware. and you should consult your
documentation.

However, I echo Mick's advice. The actual performance improvement with
RAID0 is very slight--hardly noticeable in most cases--and not worth
the increased risk of losing data.

Unlike Mick, however, I recommend *against* RAID1 for most people.
Although some people attempt to use RAID1 mirroring as a backup
scheme, it's a very poor one, in my view. RAID 1 uses two or
more drives, each a duplicate of the others, to provide redundancy.
It's used in situations (almost always within corporations, not in
homes) where any downtown can't be tolerated, because the way it works
is that if one drive fails the other takes over seamlessly. Although
some people thing of RAID 1 as a backup technique, that is *not* what
it is, since it's subject to simultaneous loss of the original and the
mirror to many of the most common dangers threatening your
data--severe power glitches, nearby lightning strikes, virus attacks,
theft of the computer, etc. Most companies that use RAID 1 also have a
strong external backup plan in place.
 
Hey dude, I run vista in RAID 0 and I see a difference...especially with
games. Its no more risky than having the OS on one disk. With or without
RAID, if a disk with the OS on it fails, ur screwed.
 
Hey dude, I run vista in RAID 0 and I see a difference...especially with
games. Its no more risky than having the OS on one disk. With or without
RAID, if a disk with the OS on it fails, ur screwed.


That is *not* correct. It's considerably more risky. If you have more
than one drive, the chances of one of them failing is greater than the
chances of a single drive failing.
 
I didnt ask you, I stated my experience.

Ken Blake said:
That is *not* correct. It's considerably more risky. If you have more
than one drive, the chances of one of them failing is greater than the
chances of a single drive failing.
 
I didnt ask you, I stated my experience.


When you make a public statement here that is not correct, regardless
of who you asked or whether you asked anybody, *expect* to be
corrected.
 
What proof do you have that RAID0 fails more often than a single HD? Unless
you have hard data, its an opinion, not a fact, you mook.
 
What proof do you have that RAID0 fails more often than a single HD? Unless
you have hard data, its an opinion, not a fact, you mook.



LOL! Sure, resort to name-calling. That's a great way to prove you're
right.

Look at any elementary book on probability or statistics.



 
If you buy a 2nd car, does it increase the chance the first car will break
down? Of course not. You may have 2 HD in RAID, but millions are made. 2 HD
doesn't "double" the risk. If their is any increased risk, it is miniscule.
And with regular backups, there is 0 risk. The same risk is present with a
single HD. I wasnt name calling, mook is a funny word
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Back
Top