RAID 0 or RAID 1 for HDD

[danixdlolz]

Hi guys, I recently bought 2 WD Caviar Blue 1TB and still don't decide whether to put them in RAID 0 or RAID 1. I would really use the extra space and speed but I've heard that RAID 0 is "extremely dangerous" and what not. So then I considered RAID 1, and I just plain don't know

[WinNut]

RAID 0 basically offers an extra failure point because the file system is spread across the disks, so if one fails you can't recover anything from the active one since it needs the file system data from the other one.

RAID 1 clones the disk and basically copies the data from one drive to the other so that if one fails you can get the data back.

[Jaredcb03]

RAID 1 you'll get 1TB useable HOWEVER you'll have redundancy (one drive can fail and you won't lose data).

 

RAID 0 you'll get 2TB useable  and better perfrormance HOWEVER no redundancy (if a drive dies you lose all your data). 

 

Edit:

Raid 1 = mirror

Raid 0 = stripe with no parity

[danixdlolz]

RAID 0 basically offers an extra failure point because the file system is spread across the disks, so if one fails you can't recover anything from the active one since it needs the file system data from the other one.

RAID 1 clones the disk and basically copies the data from one drive to the other so that if one fails you can get the data back.

 

 

RAID 1 you'll get 1TB useable HOWEVER you'll have redundancy (one drive can fail and you won't lose data).

 

RAID 0 you'll get 2TB useable  and better perfrormance HOWEVER no redundancy (if a drive dies you lose all your data). 

 

Edit:

Raid 1 = mirror

Raid 0 = stripe with no parity

And is it very likely for a RAID 0 to fail? 

[Jaredcb03]

And is it very likely for a RAID 0 to fail? 

You're really asking me how likely one of the drives WD drives are to fail.. I wish I could tell you but I can't see into the future

[danixdlolz]

You're really asking me how likely one of the drives WD drives are to fail.. I wish I could tell you but I can't see into the future

Lol true, I guess I'll stick with RAID 0 and backup everything into an external 2TB hard drive once in a while

[FSBAlston]

Speed vs. Security. What's more important to you? That's the question you should ask yourself. If you can externally back up (up to) 2tb of data, then raid 0 is for you. If you have vital documents going on the drive, raid 1 gives you redundancy. All depends on how you want to use it.

[Jaredcb03]

Lol true, I guess I'll stick with RAID 0 and backup everything into an external 2TB hard drive once in a while

Good idea!

[danixdlolz]

Speed vs. Security. What's more important to you? That's the question you should ask yourself. If you can externally back up (up to) 2tb of data, then raid 0 is for you. If you have vital documents going on the drive, raid 1 gives you redundancy. All depends on how you want to use it.

In this case I do have an external hard drive so I'll stick with RAID 0

[FSBAlston]

In this case I do have an external hard drive so I'll stick with RAID 0

Oh yeah you'll be fine then. Small consumer raids rarely fail, but my rule of thumb has always been redundancy. External hdd back up on a regular basis and you'll enjoy the added speed of a raid 0.

[byubi]

RAID 0 is "extremely dangerous"

That is extremely wrong.

How many times a single drive have failed on you? multiply that by 2. That's how risky RAID 0 is.

[WinNut]

If you're willing to spend money on 4 identical drives (which I doubt) you can run a RAID 10 array, which basically combines RAID 0 and RAID 1. More info.