Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 17 to 21 of 21

Thread: Basic RAID question

  1. #17
    RIP Evy mroz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    A wonderful avatar filled place
    Posts
    588
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked
    16 times in 15 posts
    • mroz's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte P35-DS4 rev 1.1
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 G0 @ 2.4GHz (was @ 3.2GHz), TRU120X (lapped) + Sythe S-Flex 1600rpm
      • Memory:
      • Corsair 6GiB DDR2 Twin2X 6400 C4 (was 2GiB)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung Spinpoint 500GB x 2
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 460 (was Gigabyte 7600GS passive)
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX 520
      • Case:
      • Antec 900 aka The Vacuum Cleaner
      • Monitor(s):
      • They're everywhere
      • Internet:
      • Zen upto 75Mb/s (typically 26Mb/s when no one else is using the internet)

    Re: Basic RAID question

    Quote Originally Posted by pauldarkside View Post
    It seems to me that IMR, or practically any other software RAID solution for that matter, is ideally suited to those seeking performance and redundancy on a budget. Like partitions, IMR will suffer when accessing data on both parts at the same time.
    Does anyone have performance stats comparing the following:

    a) Copying between two drives

    b) Setting up two RAID 0 using a pair of drives & copying from one RAID to the other?

    That'd be useful to give an idea of the worst case performance loss as a result of configuring the drives in this way.

    I'm considering RAIDing the drives in my next system & in the past have used a pair of drives, one for OS & scratch space, one for data. Thus I'm often doing disk intensive stuff involving shifting data between drives.

    I'm wondering now, if I go with a pair of drives configured to give me a RAID 0 for pagefile & scratch and a RAID 1 for OS & data, what performance loss I'll see for cross RAID transfers. Can't seem to find this info anywhere.

    FWIW If I go with this option I'll later add another pair of drives with a further RAID 0/RAID 1 split for scratch / data back ups, which will eliminate most of those losses.

  2. #18
    Old Fool!
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    1,027
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    37 times in 31 posts
    • EtheAv8r's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS Maximus V Gene
      • CPU:
      • i5 3570K @ 4500 Mhz
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb
      • Storage:
      • 2 x Samsung EVO 850 SSD; 1 x Samsung 2TB HD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GeForce GTX 970
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic S-12 650 Energy+
      • Case:
      • Corsair Carbide
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home 64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2713H
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity II

    Re: Basic RAID question

    Quote Originally Posted by master811 View Post
    I saw somewhere they did a comparison of a separate Raid 0 and Raid 1with the IM Raid 0/Raid1 and the performance difference was pretty much negligible.

    http://techreport.com/reviews/2005q1...d/index.x?pg=1

    have a look through there, they basically conclude that there is no downside to using IM raid. The only problem you will have is if you try accessing data from both Raid 0 and 1 on the IM arrays at the same time, as the disk heads will have to access both at the same time, so copying data from raid 0 to 1 or vice versa etc, but generally I think the benefits would outweigh the problems. (mentioned here http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.a...tno=206&pgno=1 )
    This is usefull, but I would comment that these reports are over 2 years old, and the later marks of the Intel ICHnR controller have got faster and the software better. Also in the first artical they created the RAID 1 first, and the RAID 0 second. The objective of RAID 0 is speed/performance, and they lost a lot of this potential by creating the RAID 0 second, and therefore on the slower inner cylinders. Had they created the RAID 0 first, there would have been a marked improvement methinks.
    Try to make each and every day the best it can be.

  3. #19
    Senior Amoeba iranu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    On the dinner table. Blechh!
    Posts
    3,532
    Thanks
    111
    Thanked
    156 times in 106 posts
    • iranu's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus Maximus Gene VI
      • CPU:
      • 4670K @4.3Ghz
      • Memory:
      • 8Gb Samsung Green
      • Storage:
      • 1x 256Gb Samsung 830 SSD 2x640gb HGST raid 0
      • Graphics card(s):
      • MSI R9 390
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX620W Modular
      • Case:
      • Cooler Master Silencio 352
      • Operating System:
      • Win 7 ultimate 64 bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • 23" DELL Ultrasharp U2312HM
      • Internet:
      • 16mb broadband

    Re: Basic RAID question

    You may also wish to have a quick read of this if you haven't already. http://forums.hexus.net/showthread.php?t=115697

    Funnily enough, whilst doing abit of research I came across the intel raid matrix thingy yesterday.
    "Reality is what it is, not what you want it to be." Frank Zappa. ----------- "The invisible and the non-existent look very much alike." Huang Po.----------- "A drowsy line of wasted time bathes my open mind", - Ride.

  4. #20
    RIP Evy mroz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    A wonderful avatar filled place
    Posts
    588
    Thanks
    40
    Thanked
    16 times in 15 posts
    • mroz's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte P35-DS4 rev 1.1
      • CPU:
      • Q6600 G0 @ 2.4GHz (was @ 3.2GHz), TRU120X (lapped) + Sythe S-Flex 1600rpm
      • Memory:
      • Corsair 6GiB DDR2 Twin2X 6400 C4 (was 2GiB)
      • Storage:
      • Samsung Spinpoint 500GB x 2
      • Graphics card(s):
      • GTX 460 (was Gigabyte 7600GS passive)
      • PSU:
      • Corsair HX 520
      • Case:
      • Antec 900 aka The Vacuum Cleaner
      • Monitor(s):
      • They're everywhere
      • Internet:
      • Zen upto 75Mb/s (typically 26Mb/s when no one else is using the internet)

    Re: Basic RAID question

    Quote Originally Posted by EtheAv8r View Post
    Also in the first artical they created the RAID 1 first, and the RAID 0 second. The objective of RAID 0 is speed/performance, and they lost a lot of this potential by creating the RAID 0 second, and therefore on the slower inner cylinders. Had they created the RAID 0 first, there would have been a marked improvement methinks.
    According to the second page they used two configs for testing IMRAID; the first had RAID 1 first which they used to provide the RAID 1 stats only; the second had RAID 0 first & again was used to supply only the RAID 0 stats.

  5. #21
    Old Fool!
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Cambridgeshire
    Posts
    1,027
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked
    37 times in 31 posts
    • EtheAv8r's system
      • Motherboard:
      • ASUS Maximus V Gene
      • CPU:
      • i5 3570K @ 4500 Mhz
      • Memory:
      • 16Gb
      • Storage:
      • 2 x Samsung EVO 850 SSD; 1 x Samsung 2TB HD
      • Graphics card(s):
      • nVidia GeForce GTX 970
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic S-12 650 Energy+
      • Case:
      • Corsair Carbide
      • Operating System:
      • Windows 10 Home 64
      • Monitor(s):
      • Dell U2713H
      • Internet:
      • BT Infinity II

    Re: Basic RAID question

    Quote Originally Posted by mroz View Post
    According to the second page they used two configs for testing IMRAID; the first had RAID 1 first which they used to provide the RAID 1 stats only; the second had RAID 0 first & again was used to supply only the RAID 0 stats.
    oppss that'll teach me to quick read!... I stand korrected.
    Try to make each and every day the best it can be.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. RAID 0 or 5?
    By Bleek in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 26-03-2006, 11:16 PM
  2. Raid question
    By starbuck in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14-06-2004, 02:35 PM
  3. Raid Question!
    By myth in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 22-05-2004, 04:34 PM
  4. Basic n00b question
    By Skii in forum PC Hardware and Components
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 27-10-2003, 06:46 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •