Setting up RAID 0

[Guest]

I have a perfect running system using a Seagate SATA drive. The system is
built on an ASUS P4G8X Deluxe motherboard which includes the Silion Image
SATA RAID controller. I was considering acquiring a second SATA drive in
order to set up RAID 0 on my system but was hoping to avoid having to
reinstall my system to do it. This is what I was hoping to do:
1. Back up my entire system to an external USB 2.0 drive
2. Install the second SATA drive and set up the RAID 0 array in the BIOS
3. Set up partitions as before
4. Format both drives (now seen as one drive?)
5. Connect the USB 2.0 drive back up and RESTORE my system

My question comes down to , will this work? I would apreciate your comments
on this plan.

Thanks in Advance,

 

[Tim]

Neal,

Going to all this effort for RAID 0 will turn your perfectly running system
into one that has over twice the probability of system failure with total
loss of all data. If you are determined to do this, you absolutely must make
sure that your have good backups at all times. For most users, going to RAID
0 does not give substantial performance improvements (anandtech does a good
review a while back) due to the sporadic nature of IO's for most
applications. Windows XP boot and video editing are exceptions here.

If you must implement RAID, then consider RAID 1 - mirroring as that will
substantially reduce the probability of dataloss, give some minor
improvements in disc IO (less than RAID 0, but if you have apps that can
benefit, an improvement in reads, but none on writes).

Your method is correct for RAID 0, but you will need to install Windows
after step 4. to do the restore unless you use a quality 3rd party backup
system that supports such restores.

For RAID 1, the method can vary by controller. For example the Intel ICH5R
raid controller supports dynamic creation of RAID 1 volumes at run time,
otherwise the method would be the same as above - in your case, check the
SIL manual.

Check for bios updates & driver updates before you start. If the RAID
controller is embedded in the motherboard then the RAID firmware will likely
be in the bios, so check the Asus web site. SIL is usually best for drivers,
but check Asus for drivers first. Do some googling on your motherboard and
SIL and RAID to see what others have said.

I suggest you install the drive and run it for a week or more as an ordinary
data disk and do a chkdsk on it just to ensure you have not got a Bart
Simpsons father.

- Tim

 

[joseph]

i agree that raid 0 is most likely useless to you and
suggest you simply use the additional hd as a new drive.
raid 1 is good, but if you actually want the additional
storage space, it wont help with that. i use it because i
am lazy about backups... a raid 1 install on some
controllers will not require a reinstall.

 

[Frank]

What facts are you basing your assumptions upon?
The performance increases are noticeable in real
time. I have 3 WD 40GB HDDs on a fasttrak 4000,
on a RAID 0 experiencing not a burp in over a year.
A good backup is a must on any system......
This includes SP2.

 

[Tim]

Frank,

They are not assumptions. If I were to assume, I would have done what most
users of RAID 0 assume - that it would be blindingly faster regardless.
However I come with the experience that knows that there are many
implementations of RAID, that RAID 1 can be faster than plain discs, that
RAID 0 has risks, and if you don't have backups you are inviting trouble.

I have read many reviews and benchmark articles all of which come to the
same conclusions: that using RAID 0 is not beneficial for the typical
computer user, that the times when performance from RAID 0 will be
beneficial (IE RAID 0 benefits kick in) are limited.

I suggest you do some research of your own - anandtech ran a detailed
benchmark recently as have tomshardware to name two. There are very many
benchmarks out there. The issue is not How fast can RAID 0 read (or write),
it is how much of an improvement in system performance will it give you for
your use of the system? It is the actual performance improvement that is the
reason for putting RAID 0 in (it is the increased performance and resilience
that is the reason for putting RAID 1 in), benchmarks will not tell you
anything useful unless you either have the knowledge needed to see how they
relate to your circumstances or they do relate to your circumstances (the
anandtech review did this very well).

Many base their *perceptions* on New system with New RAID 0 ==> very much
faster so its all due to RAID 0 when they have also often gone from < 2GHz
processor, to a 800Mhz FSB, SATA RAID (using native SATA instead of native
IDE helps), clean XP install, and other factors.

It is very common to hear of people that disregarded advice about the
vulnerability of RAID 0 and the "I have good backups" attitude, then hear
back from them after a time with a "I know you told me so, the RAID crashed,
so now I support your stance" story. Too many people do not backup, or do
not backup properly, and underestimate the amount of time it takes to
rebuild a system after a system drive failure - if you have 100GB if stuff
is on your disc drive, you have it there for a reason and will want it back.
If you don't want it back then its time to do a clean up. One bod asked
about having x Terabytes of storage: my answer was why? and how will you
back it up because it will take 35 hours to do so?

RAID 0 is a risk which is best avoided unless the user of the RAID 0 is well
educated on its pitfalls. A person that is not aware of the pitfalls before
hand is not IMHO well enough informed and is likely to have a nasty
experience.

- Tim