What is SATA RAID 1 ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Matthew
  • Start date Start date
M

Matthew

Hi,

I'm probably going to get a Gigabyte GA-P35C-DS3R motherboard for my new
build, specs. URL below.

http://www.giga-byte.com/Products/M...board&ProductID=2749&ProductName=GA-P35C-DS3R

The spec says that the Gigabyte SATA2 chip has "Support for SATA RAID 0,
RAID 1, and JBOD"

I've been thinking about using RAID 1 (the disk mirroring) for my new
build. However I don't know what 'SATA RAID' is and if it differs from
normal RAID. Someone told me they are not the same thing. Is that true and
how do they differ?

What I'm planning to do is buy 2 identical SATA 500 GB hard disks, and
configure them with RAID 1 as a protection against hardware failure - I've
had 3 hard disks completely die on me in the past (always inconveniently)
and now that the SATA 500 GB disks are _relatively_ cheap, I'm going to
implement a RAID mirroring solution and be 'safe'. Can I do this with SATA
RAID 1 and is there anything I should bear in mind, given I've never used
any kind of RAID before.

Many thanks and regards, etc..
 
: The spec says that the Gigabyte SATA2 chip has "Support for SATA RAID 0,
: RAID 1, and JBOD"
:
: I've been thinking about using RAID 1 (the disk mirroring) for my new
: build. However I don't know what 'SATA RAID' is and if it differs from
: normal RAID. Someone told me they are not the same thing. Is that true and
: how do they differ?

It means that RAID is supported on the SATA devices. The P35 chipset
supports the intel "Matrix Raid" software mirror driver

:
: What I'm planning to do is buy 2 identical SATA 500 GB hard disks, and
: configure them with RAID 1 as a protection against hardware failure - I've
: had 3 hard disks completely die on me in the past (always inconveniently)
: and now that the SATA 500 GB disks are _relatively_ cheap, I'm going to
: implement a RAID mirroring solution and be 'safe'. Can I do this with SATA
: RAID 1 and is there anything I should bear in mind, given I've never used
: any kind of RAID before.
:

Yes you can do this. Mirroring's a good idea. You're not 'safe'
though without doing other things like backing up but that aside
you're generally speaking a lot better off mirroring than not
mirroring, and far, far better off mirroring than if you were both not
mirroring and striping.

If you install this on a new system configure the BIOS for RAID before
you install and when installing windows if that's what you're using
use F8 during the install to load the Intel RAID drivers from a floppy
so windows starts up using the intel stuff. You can refit it later
but it's cumbersome.
 
Howard said:
: The spec says that the Gigabyte SATA2 chip has "Support for SATA RAID 0,
: RAID 1, and JBOD"
:
: I've been thinking about using RAID 1 (the disk mirroring) for my new
: build. However I don't know what 'SATA RAID' is and if it differs from
: normal RAID. Someone told me they are not the same thing. Is that true and
: how do they differ?

It means that RAID is supported on the SATA devices. The P35 chipset
supports the intel "Matrix Raid" software mirror driver

:
: What I'm planning to do is buy 2 identical SATA 500 GB hard disks, and
: configure them with RAID 1 as a protection against hardware failure - I've
: had 3 hard disks completely die on me in the past (always inconveniently)
: and now that the SATA 500 GB disks are _relatively_ cheap, I'm going to
: implement a RAID mirroring solution and be 'safe'. Can I do this with SATA
: RAID 1 and is there anything I should bear in mind, given I've never used
: any kind of RAID before.
:

Yes you can do this. Mirroring's a good idea. You're not 'safe'
though without doing other things like backing up but that aside
you're generally speaking a lot better off mirroring than not
mirroring, and far, far better off mirroring than if you were both not
mirroring and striping.

If you install this on a new system configure the BIOS for RAID before
you install and when installing windows if that's what you're using
use F8 during the install to load the Intel RAID drivers from a floppy
so windows starts up using the intel stuff. You can refit it later
but it's cumbersome.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your informative reply, and installation tip.

No, I wouldn't use RAID 1 as an alternative to backing up, I have an
effective and sensible backup solution, with all critical stuff, work and
comms, backed up daily and uploaded off site. I just want RAID 1 so that
if 'hard disk A' dies on me, I can just keep working using 'hard disk B'
and order a new disk to replace 'hard disk A'; thus achieving minimal
disruption to a potentially highly inconvenient hardware failure. I
believe this is exactly what it is designed to do, along with the minor
bonus of a slight increase in read speeds and the minor overhead of a tiny
drop in write speeds.

Cheers.
 
: No, I wouldn't use RAID 1 as an alternative to backing up, I have an
: effective and sensible backup solution, with all critical stuff, work and
: comms, backed up daily and uploaded off site. I just want RAID 1 so that
: if 'hard disk A' dies on me, I can just keep working using 'hard disk B'
: and order a new disk to replace 'hard disk A'; thus achieving minimal
: disruption to a potentially highly inconvenient hardware failure. I
: believe this is exactly what it is designed to do, along with the minor
: bonus of a slight increase in read speeds and the minor overhead of a tiny
: drop in write speeds.
:

Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution, maybe one of
3ware's offerings in a x16 pciex slot, so you can offload the work to
the card. I do what sort of what you're planning on doing though in
software too, across 4 drives in a RAID "10" approach for the fault
tolerance to can stay up when hopefully no more than one of the drives
takes a dump at once.

You'll like the P35 - it's nice
 
: Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution, maybe one of
: 3ware's offerings in a x16 pciex slot, so you can offload the work to
: the card. I do what sort of what you're planning on doing though in
: software too, across 4 drives in a RAID "10" approach for the fault
: tolerance to can stay up when hopefully no more than one of the drives
: takes a dump at once.

Sheesh I usually try not to post things that come out as confused
sounding as that paragraph came out :( And it's only 1300 here
 
Matthew said:
No, I wouldn't use RAID 1 as an alternative to backing up, I have an effective
and sensible backup solution, with all critical stuff, work and comms, backed
up daily and uploaded off site. I just want RAID 1 so that if 'hard disk A'
dies on me, I can just keep working using 'hard disk B' and order a new disk
to replace 'hard disk A'; thus achieving minimal disruption to a potentially
highly inconvenient hardware failure. I believe this is exactly what it is
designed to do, along with the minor bonus of a slight increase in read speeds
and the minor overhead of a tiny drop in write speeds.
Click to expand...

Another option is to install your OS and apps on a single high-performance HD
(e.g., WD Raptor 150), and use Acronis TrueImage or similar to clone that to a
primary partition on your [500 GB] data drive. If the boot drive fails, you can
still boot from the data drive until you get a replacement.

A third, external, HD can be used for backup.
 
Howard said:
: Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution, maybe one of
: 3ware's offerings in a x16 pciex slot, so you can offload the work to
: the card. I do what sort of what you're planning on doing though in
: software too, across 4 drives in a RAID "10" approach for the fault
: tolerance to can stay up when hopefully no more than one of the drives
: takes a dump at once.

Sheesh I usually try not to post things that come out as confused
sounding as that paragraph came out :( And it's only 1300 here
Click to expand...

Do you mean I would be better off with a dedicated RAID PCI card? They are
quite expensive I think. But I am slightly confused now...

You wrote that:

'Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution...'

Isn't that what I would be getting with the on board SATA RAID? A hardware
RAID solution?

Thanks.
 
Matthew said:
Do you mean I would be better off with a dedicated RAID PCI card? They are
quite expensive I think. But I am slightly confused now...

You wrote that:

'Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution...'

Isn't that what I would be getting with the on board SATA RAID? A hardware
RAID solution?
Click to expand...

Since current on-board RAID solutions use the PCIe bus in the first place, there
is little reason to buy a RAID card to use the RAID 1 or 0 that is already
offered by the on-board chip. While a PCIe card MAY offload some of the I/O
tasking from the CPU, it is probably not worth the cost for the average
consumer.

Besides, the DS3R has TWO integrated RAID controllers -- the Intel ICH9R
Southbridge controller and a Gigabyte SATA2 controller. It already supports
RAID 0, 1, 5, and 10!
 
John said:
Since current on-board RAID solutions use the PCIe bus in the first place, there
is little reason to buy a RAID card to use the RAID 1 or 0 that is already
offered by the on-board chip. While a PCIe card MAY offload some of the I/O
tasking from the CPU, it is probably not worth the cost for the average
consumer.

Besides, the DS3R has TWO integrated RAID controllers -- the Intel ICH9R
Southbridge controller and a Gigabyte SATA2 controller. It already supports
RAID 0, 1, 5, and 10!
Click to expand...

Thanks John - I had not realized this. A couple more questions I'm afraid.

Firstly and most importantly will using RAID 1 have any kind of impact on
my CPU (in addition to just having a regular hard disk)? I guess I just
assumed that the fact the controller is on board meant that did ALL the work.

Secondly what's the difference between the 2 integrated controllers (if
any) and which should I use?

Thanks again guys for your help, it's greatly appreciated for a relative
build novice like me.
 
: Howard Goldstein wrote:
: > : Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution, maybe one of
: > : 3ware's offerings in a x16 pciex slot, so you can offload the work to
: > : the card. I do what sort of what you're planning on doing though in
: > : software too, across 4 drives in a RAID "10" approach for the fault
: > : tolerance to can stay up when hopefully no more than one of the drives
: > : takes a dump at once.
: >
: > Sheesh I usually try not to post things that come out as confused
: > sounding as that paragraph came out :( And it's only 1300 here
:
: Do you mean I would be better off with a dedicated RAID PCI card? They are
: quite expensive I think. But I am slightly confused now...

Yes and yes they are expensive.

:
: You wrote that:
:
: 'Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution...'
:
: Isn't that what I would be getting with the on board SATA RAID? A hardware
: RAID solution?

No, the RAID functionality is software, for the intel stuff using the
ICH9 it's a wrapper around the AHCI stuff you can manipulate via the
control panel (or task tray icon), along with some BIOS functionality
for array maintenance.
 
Matthew said:
Firstly and most importantly will using RAID 1 have any kind of impact on my
CPU (in addition to just having a regular hard disk)? I guess I just assumed
that the fact the controller is on board meant that did ALL the work.
Click to expand...

There will be a minor hit on performance with RAID 1, but not anything you would
notice without benchmarking sofftware.

Secondly what's the difference between the 2 integrated controllers (if any)
and which should I use?
Click to expand...

The Intel controller has the RAID 5 and 10 capability, and handles more HDs.
The Gigabyte controller also has the IDE controller attached.

I would use the Intel controller for your main drives (HD and DVD), and the
Gigabyte controller for IDE and eSATA. There may be other opinions on this
aspect.
 
Howard Goldstein said:
:
: 'Optimally you're better off with a hardware solution...'
:
: Isn't that what I would be getting with the on board SATA RAID? A hardware
: RAID solution?

No, the RAID functionality is software, for the intel stuff using the
ICH9 it's a wrapper around the AHCI stuff you can manipulate via the
control panel (or task tray icon), along with some BIOS functionality
for array maintenance.
Click to expand...

Technically you may be correct, but the on-board RAID is for practical purposes
a hardware/firmware function. It is NOT a "software RAID" like some early
attempts at software RAID 5 on the cheap.

The RAID array is built by the BIOS prior to the OS booting. Windows requires a
software driver to access the array. It is likely an add-in card would require
a similar driver.
 
John said:
There will be a minor hit on performance with RAID 1, but not anything you would
notice without benchmarking sofftware.



The Intel controller has the RAID 5 and 10 capability, and handles more HDs.
The Gigabyte controller also has the IDE controller attached.

I would use the Intel controller for your main drives (HD and DVD), and the
Gigabyte controller for IDE and eSATA. There may be other opinions on this
aspect.
Click to expand...


Thanks again for the help and advise. Have a good weekend. Regards,
Matthew
 
Back
Top