1.2TB Raid

jordan · 10-13-2006, 02:51 PM

I've been thinking about doing a raid out of SATA hard drives. I read an article in popular science (I think) that had this solution:

1 Sata 5 Port Raid 5 controler from newegg.com - $200
5 Sata power splitters - $5 or $6
5 300GB Sata HDs - $150 each
Old Spare computer with 5 open bays running Windows, Linux or Mac.

I don't think I will go for the complete 1.2TB right off the bat. Anyone else currently doing a Raid in their home PC?

**Lyte** · 10-13-2006, 04:21 PM

I think Mr. McDaddy did... but I'm not sure. I know someone here said they were going to try it... or had done it!

Lyte

firestorm · 10-14-2006, 01:11 PM

I've helped family members run RAID 1 and I got my dad's on RAID 0 atm.

jordan · 10-14-2006, 01:34 PM

The only thing stopping me from doing this right now is getting a PCI Card for this. They have very cheap RAID 0 and 1s ($20-$40) but I'd rather have RAID 5 or at the least Raid 3.

McDaddy · 10-15-2006, 12:46 PM

what are your trying to acomplish? each raid set up is designed to have it own individual strengths. i am familar with raid0 and raid 1, bot further than that, i dont know a whole lot. i would suggest look at Wikipedia.com.

ok i already did the search for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redunda...t_disks#RAID_3

for the home user id do not see a need for anything other than raid0, or raid1. only if you are trying to experiment around, and see what kind of preformance that you can get, but unless you are using a huge amount of Hdd space all the time, i dont see any noticable bennifit.

for a business, or a college server, that might be quite a bit differance, but for simple home operations, i dont see this being necessary any time soon in the future

firestorm · 10-15-2006, 01:45 PM

Do you really need a pci card for this? How many sata drives will your mb support?

jordan · 10-15-2006, 02:52 PM

Yes, you need a raid controller and in my case it has to be PCI becuase the computer I am using does not have PCI-X or E. You can always do a software raid but this is very slow.

The reason for raid 5 is because of parity striping, redundancy and checksum. I'm concerned more with the integrity of the data than the amount of space. Raid 1 seems like a waste of space and Raid 0 has no redundancy.

bdude · 10-16-2006, 01:39 AM

Sounds cool, may I ask why you need 1.2TB? that's a lot of storage

jordan · 10-16-2006, 01:18 PM

I don't, I'm only going to do around 500GB.

firestorm · 10-17-2006, 04:26 PM

raid 1 is for those people who don't really back up their data good. So I just did a software raid on theirs.

MHavoc · 10-18-2006, 12:21 PM

If you don't back up them up regularly, I would be careful of RAID 0 setups. They can be difficult to recover when they crash because files are spread across both disks. I speak from experience, but I'm sure most of you all know that. Just thought I would add to the discussion.

http://www.pc101.com/images/smilies/halloween/hulk2.gif

jordan · 10-28-2006, 11:42 AM

So I finally took the plunge and bought the hardware.

I purchased this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16816115015

which newegg.com says only raid 0/1/JBOD but it actually has RAID 5. The box even says Raid 5 in the lower left hand corner. Not sure what newegg's deal is.

I also bought some 320gb 7200 RPM Sata HDs although I would of prefered 10,000 RPM but they were just to expensive for what I needed (simple file storage). I'll post an update once I get the the hardware in an installed.