A Question About Raid 0

[FireFox]

I'm thinking of doing something like that with a pair of 120GB or 240GB SSD's in the future for my beast built but someone said that I better make sure I back everything up because if one drive fails then you've lost your data (even though if you are rocking a single drive PC and it fails then you've lost your data anyway, so I can't see any additional problems compared to single drive computing) but what intrigued me is that he said that Raid 0 increases stress on the drives and increases the likelihood of a failure.

 

Is this true?

[Blade of Grass]

Well, technically, it doesn't introduce more stress or anything, but the problem is that you have two drives, so you now have a bigger chance of losing everything, because although both have the same chance of failing, now you have two drives that can fail, with either making you lose all data.

 

Hope that helps.

[fishymamba]

You have 2x the chance of data loss because if one drive out of two fails you lose everything. You can always just buy a 500-1000GB HDD and back up your data to it. 

In my opinion there is no point of having 2 SSDs in RAID0, I don't think that too many people need a 900+MB/s transfer speed.

 

Raid 0 will not put more stress on the drives. The stress is usually on the other raid levels because they swap data around to keep the drives balanced. 

[iNsahne303]

As the users above me already said, you're putting more load on the sata-controler but not on the drives as it is in RAID 1.

 

On my personal opinion it's not worth to get SSD Raid. Get an SSD and an HDD.

[FireFox]

You have 2x the chance of data loss because if one drive out of two fails you lose everything

 

But surely you have an equal chance of a hard drive failing in a single drive system?

 

Also about the 900MB/s speeds I was thinking as a program and OS drive/s, I thought the faster the better to reduce loading times.

[The1nf3cted0n3]

ssds are extermely relayable esspecally the plextor m5p/m5p xtreme almost enterprise grade

[FireFox]

almost enterprise grade

 

Sweet, I love enterprise grade components.

[IdeaStormer]

You have 2x the chance of data loss because if one drive out of two fails you lose everything. You can always just buy a 500-1000GB HDD and back up your data to it. 

In my opinion there is no point of having 2 SSDs in RAID0, I don't think that too many people need a 900+MB/s transfer speed.

 

Raid 0 will not put more stress on the drives. The stress is usually on the other raid levels because they swap data around to keep the drives balanced. 

 

You should try two SSD's in RAID 0, no waiting at all! If you can't imagine it then yea, one SSD is fine, but living on the fast lane is well fast!

[FireFox]

I'm thinking of building a computing monster, I've priced it up and so far its £5,400 which might take me till the end of time to save up for

[orangecat]

Just buy good SSD's and you should be fine. You don't need to worry about anything unless you get a bad drive and you should never store valuable data on a RAID 0 anyways.

[FireFox]

For storage I'm thinking of a single (and backed up) 4TB or so Caviar Red

[fishymamba]

For storage I'm thinking of a single (and backed up) 4TB or so Caviar Red

I recommend a Seagate Barracuda 3 TB instead, The WD RED drives are meant to be used for mass storage in RAID configurations. 

I would recommend the WD Black drives, but I used to have one and it was very loud, louder than all the fans in my system.

The Seagate Barracuda is quieter and a bit faster than the black in some tests that I did. 

[FireFox]

I'm not keen on Seagate drives, I've had a few mates in the past which the drives just locked up, I'd prefer WD drives (personal preference) because in 15 years or so playing with computers I've never had any problems apart from my own incompetance.

[nishank93]

For backups, you might want to look at WD's RAID Edition drives. They're more baller versions of the RED drives ;)

[FireFox]

Cool, gonna take note of that:)