Raid 0 And Raid 1? Wtf?

[tesco]

with raid 0 you dont have the whoel file on each of the hard drives, you have half of it on each, when it needs the file it reads from both hard drives at the same time becuase it needs both halves, so its double the performance.

[Java Boy]

Originally posted by abu_has_the_power+28 January 2004 - 02:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (abu_has_the_power &#064; 28 January 2004 - 02:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Java Boy@27 January 2004 - 21:38
I have 2 exactly identical 120GB hard drives set up in a Raid 1 formation "Mirror imaging" each other..so when your computers requesting information or is running a process it draws from 2 resources instaed of one.
Other than that I cant tell ya much about Raid as Im still discoveribg it on my new computer..it takes 12 hard drives(A through to L) and 6 CD/DVD rom drives

so raid 1 is basically running both hdds at once and u only get the storage space on 1 hdd? wtf? that sucks&#33; [/b][/quote]
Thats why Im saving up to get 12x 250GB hard drives as ive got raid 0 through to 5 available to me in my options.Now I just need to find out whats what...lol

[lynx]

Originally posted by ROSSCO_2004@28 January 2004 - 02:05
with raid 0 you dont have the whoel file on each of the hard drives, you have half of it on each, when it needs the file it reads from both hard drives at the same time becuase it needs both halves, so its double the performance.

That&#39;s true, as long as you remember that they need to be on separate channels for it to be effective.

There is also a small drawback with raid 0. If one of your drives goes down, you lose the contents of both drives (although of course you only need to replace one drive).

[abu_has_the_power]

ok. thanks. screw raid then. i&#39;ve got different stuff on both drives. my 2nd hdd for my &#39;stuff&#39;, and my 1st one for my programs and windows and so on

[SciManAl]

There is also a small drawback with raid 0. If one of your drives goes down, you lose the contents of both drives (although of course you only need to replace one drive).

Yeah that would suck, but then how often does the drive go down??? I have never had a drive go down in all 6 years of expierience ...

stuff&#39;

pron...

[abu_has_the_power]

Originally posted by SciManAl@27 January 2004 - 22:13

There is also a small drawback with raid 0. If one of your drives goes down, you lose the contents of both drives (although of course you only need to replace one drive).

Yeah that would suck, but then how often does the drive go down??? I have never had a drive go down in all 6 years of expierience ...

stuff&#39;

pron...

lol. i do have some pron and some good pics of natalie portman and liv tyler on there. as well as some game images.

[lynx]

Originally posted by SciManAl@28 January 2004 - 02:13

There is also a small drawback with raid 0. If one of your drives goes down, you lose the contents of both drives (although of course you only need to replace one drive).

Yeah that would suck, but then how often does the drive go down??? I have never had a drive go down in all 6 years of expierience ...

stuff&#39;

pron...

I had one "fail" a couple of years ago, but fortunately managed to get a replacement before it totally crashed. The problem with raid 0 is that you can&#39;t really make a copy of just one disk, so you need to get a pair of disks (and another raid controller) or a much bigger disk in order to back up your data if one starts to fail.

That&#39;s why I would go for raid 5, or raid 0+1 if I could afford it.

Edit: mind you, if I could afford it I would go for 15000rpm UltraSCSI 320 disks.

[SciManAl]

I had one "fail" a couple of years ago, but fortunately managed to get a replacement before it totally crashed. The problem with raid 0 is that you can&#39;t really make a copy of just one disk, so you need to get a pair of disks (and another raid controller) or a much bigger disk in order to back up your data if one starts to fail.

That&#39;s why I would go for raid 5, or raid 0+1 if I could afford it.

Very good points... I am thinking that is you had raid 0 for games etc that you just have to reinstall and then some non raid for files that would be best...