Raid 0

[pix-]

Hello,

 

I have some questions for those of you who own more informations about raid0, i will remain eternally grateful if you answer.

 

First, 4x samsung 850 evo 120gb is just 20$ more than 2x250gb wich is equal with 1x500gb. For the maximum speed is worth to lose the reliability ? And should i choose 4x120gb, 2x250gb or 1x500gb ?

 

Second, if you will recommend 4x120gb, samsung 850 evo is more better than crucial mx100 or sandisk ultra II to worth ? Because 4x120gb 850 evo = 5x120gb ultra ll = 5x120gb mx100 price.

 

Third, if i choose raid, after installing windows can i partition in C:\ (Windows) and D:\ (Other) ? And if i can partition, in time i can just format only C:\ (with windows) but let D:\ untouched ? Like old no raid hdd way.

 

Fourth, if i can partition raid0 ssd's, can i have C:\ with Windows (NTFS format), D:\ (NTFS other), E:\ (mac osx journaled format [for hackintosh osx]) ?

 

Thanks a lot for your time guys,

 

Peace,

 

 

 

[bbrooking18]

First off you can't set up a RAID 0 array with 4 drives, secondly one larger drive is probably preferable to two smaller ones due to reliability and the fact that RAID 0 recovery is either very difficult and requires a specialist which is expensive

[pix-]

First off you can't set up a RAID 0 array with 4 drives, secondly one larger drive is probably preferable to two smaller ones due to reliability and the fact that RAID 0 recovery is either very difficult and requires a specialist which is expensive

 

Why can't you setup 4 drives in raid0 ? Yes, you can lose your data, but i think everyone should have an external hdd for backup. I have

[bbrooking18]

Why can't you setup 4 drives in raid0 ? Yes, you can lose your data, but i think everyone should have an external hdd for backup. I have

As far as I am aware you can't, never heard of it being being done, for 4 drives I would suggest RAID 5 which will use storage equivalent to one drive for parity (redundancy and ability to restore) or RAID 10 which combines RAID 0 and 1 so a pair of drives with data striped across them, that pair is then mirrored onto the other two drives hope this helps

[Eniqmatic]

As far as I am aware you can't, never heard of it being being done, for 4 drives I would suggest RAID 5 which will use storage equivalent to one drive for parity (redundancy and ability to restore) or RAID 10 which combines RAID 0 and 1 so a pair of drives with data striped across them, that pair is then mirrored onto the other two drives hope this helps

Incorrect, you can easily do RAID 0 with 4 drives. Anymore than one actually as long as you have the controller for it. 

[Eniqmatic]

Hello,

 

I have some questions for those of you who own more informations about raid0, i will remain eternally grateful if you answer.

 

First, 4x samsung 850 evo 120gb is just 20$ more than 2x250gb wich is equal with 1x500gb. For the maximum speed is worth to lose the reliability ? And should i choose 4x120gb, 2x250gb or 1x500gb ?

 

Second, if you will recommend 4x120gb, samsung 850 evo is more better than crucial mx100 or sandisk ultra II to worth ? Because 4x120gb 850 evo = 5x120gb ultra ll = 5x120gb mx100 price.

 

Third, if i choose raid, after installing windows can i partition in C:\ (Windows) and D:\ (Other) ? And if i can partition, in time i can just format only C:\ (with windows) but let D:\ untouched ? Like old no raid hdd way.

 

Fourth, if i can partition raid0 ssd's, can i have C:\ with Windows (NTFS format), D:\ (NTFS other), E:\ (mac osx journaled format [for hackintosh osx]) ?

 

Thanks a lot for your time guys,

 

Peace,

 

I'd go for the 2 drives over the 4 if you want to do RAID 0, less points of failure.

 

2. Weigh up the options, cost to performance. Your unlikely to use all the speed your going to make in this instance though I would wager.

 

3 & 4 Sorry can you re-do this question its a mess and too hard to follow.

[bbrooking18]

Incorrect, you can easily do RAID 0 with 4 drives. Anymore than one actually as long as you have the controller for it. 

Okay thanks, good to know, don't really work with RAID 0, I know the basics, still learning

[pix-]

3rd was: If i choose 2x250gb raid0, it will be one drive (C:) with 500gb. Can i partition this 500gb drive in 2 drives (120gb and 380gb) for windows and programs ? I ask this because if i need to know if i can format 120gb drive and let 380gb drive untouched, with stuffs in it.

 

4th: Is like 3, but instead of partitions, both formated in NTFS, to have 2 partitions, one in NTFS (for windows) and one in MAC Os Extended-Journaled (for hackintosh). 

 

This is possible and easy if you have 2 drives, but if have them in raid, it will the same simple thing ?

[pix-]

Anyone ?

[brandishwar]

The RAID 0 will appear to your system as one single drive, so you should be able to partition it however you wish.

[brandishwar]

Okay thanks, good to know, don't really work with RAID 0, I know the basics, still learning

 

Here's a short primer.

 

RAID 0 requires two drives minimum, but can go to as many as the controller supports. Theoretically it provides the best throughput, but if you lose any drive in the array, the array is basically lost, so make sure to keep backups. All drives are available, meaning if you have 4x1TB in a RAID 0, you have 4TB of space available.

 

RAID 1 provides mirroring, requires two drives minimum, but regardless of how many you have, all will be exact copies of each other. So if you have 4x1TB drives, you will have only 1TB available storage space, but all 4 drives will be exact copies. You also should not hot-rebuild a RAID 1 (i.e. hot-swap out the dead drive and replace it with a new one while the system is still running), regardless of whether the system supports it, as you're only setting yourself up for a very painful operation doing so. You can lose all but 1 drive in a RAID 1 and still be fine, and RAID 1 is used where redundancy matters more than capacity.

 

RAID 5 provides for a parity stripe on each drive. It provides for redundancy like RAID 1, in that there is some kind of recovery available if you lose a drive, but it has an enormous write penalty where RAID 1 has only a slight write penalty -- RAID 0 has no write penalty. But, they have the benefit of being able to do a hot-rebuild, making them very useful in mission-critical systems. The rebuild carries a read penalty, but RAID 5 is designed to allow for a hot-rebuild, unlike RAID 1. You can lose 1 drive in a RAID 5 and still be fine.

 

You can find descriptions and diagrams here: http://www.thegeekstuff.com/2010/08/raid-levels-tutorial/

 

Where things really get fun is when you start talking about "nested" RAID levels. I'm going to soon be setting up a RAID 10 on my system.