Storage RAID0 or not RAID0?

Discussion in 'Hardware' started by Pookeyhead, 5 Jan 2010.

  1. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536
    As you may know... I've just built a server... which is awesome! I can back up to it over the network faster than I can to a local drive :) Also, the server is backed up to a NAS box. Considering I have 2 back ups... one of them on a system with redundancy, would you say that's enough?

    I ask because I still also have a 1.5TB internal drive for back up as well, which I was planning to still use. So I'd have back up on internal, server, and nas box.

    My current internal disk set up is thus:

    C: 1TB Spinpoint F1
    D: 1TB Spinpoint F1
    E: 1.5TB Seagate 7200.11

    I was thinking of having both F1s in RAID0 as C:, and using the seagate as a D: drive... and just relying on the server and NAS for back up.

    Good idea? Crap idea?

    Discuss

    :)
     
  2. Fazed

    Fazed Minimodder

    Joined:
    5 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    671
    Likes Received:
    25
    My father always told me, If I can't be good, be safe. But, he never said I needed to wear 3 rubber hats:D

    Ok, on a serious note, I reckon with 2 sets of backups, you'll be covering most eventualities.

    My tuppence worth.
     
    Last edited: 5 Jan 2010
  3. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536

    I forgot to mention... one of those backups is off site as well... so covered for theft and fire etc.


    I'll gather a few more opinions before I start torturing my ICH10 chipset :)
     
  4. The_Beast

    The_Beast I like wood ಠ_ಠ

    Joined:
    21 Apr 2007
    Posts:
    7,379
    Likes Received:
    164
    I'd say as long as you have one backup you should be safe


    But if you're happy with your current speed then I'd stay with a double backup
     
  5. azrael-

    azrael- I'm special...

    Joined:
    18 May 2008
    Posts:
    3,852
    Likes Received:
    124
    I'm the odd voice out here... RAID0 simply isn't worth the risk and aggravation to me.
     
  6. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536
    Thanks for opinions so far.... keep 'em coming. I shall go with the majority.
     
  7. barndoor101

    barndoor101 Bring back the demote thread!

    Joined:
    25 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    1,694
    Likes Received:
    110
    its doubtful you will see much of a difference, so i dont think it would be worth the hassle (no risk since you seem anal about backups).
     
  8. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536
    All true of course.... Part of me just wants to do it for coolness factor I suppose.

    I shall think on the matter further.
     
  9. Burnout21

    Burnout21 Is the daddy!

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    8,614
    Likes Received:
    197
    not worth the hassle chap, i know you'll just ghost it, but i would never trust a RAID 0 array
     
  10. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536
    I suspect you are right.

    I'm just running out of things to do now LOL. I suppose water cooling the i7 and shooting for a 4.5GHz 24/7 is next then :)
     
  11. Burnout21

    Burnout21 Is the daddy!

    Joined:
    9 Sep 2005
    Posts:
    8,614
    Likes Received:
    197
    too fecking right!
     
  12. bestseany

    bestseany What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    2 Jul 2009
    Posts:
    448
    Likes Received:
    6
    I'd go for RAID0. Why not.
     
  13. hughwi

    hughwi Minimodder

    Joined:
    23 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    1,591
    Likes Received:
    37
    I would go for watercooling over raid 0, especially if you are going for that added coolness factor!

    Even though you have several levels of redundant backup, just the hassle of having to rebuild an entire failed raid 0 array would be enough to put me off...
     
  14. Guest-44432

    Guest-44432 Guest

    I have my 2 F1 drives in raid 0. Been in that config since the day they where released and iI have had no problems with them.

    Simon
     
  15. barndoor101

    barndoor101 Bring back the demote thread!

    Joined:
    25 Oct 2009
    Posts:
    1,694
    Likes Received:
    110
    i thought about buying 2 F3's and putting them in RAID0 as the next step in my system, but tbh the only thing that will make a significant difference is buying an SSD. which is the next stage for me.
     
  16. wyx087

    wyx087 Homeworld 3 is happening!!

    Joined:
    15 Aug 2007
    Posts:
    11,364
    Likes Received:
    454
    just get a SSD, much easier than managing the RAID.
     
  17. confusis

    confusis Kiwi-modder

    Joined:
    5 Jan 2006
    Posts:
    2,406
    Likes Received:
    63
    buy 2 more 1tb drives and 1+0 it?
     
  18. Pookeyhead

    Pookeyhead It's big, and it's clever.

    Joined:
    30 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    10,937
    Likes Received:
    536

    Good Lord.. I've already bought 9TB of drives in the past week... you want me to buy more? LOL


    I'll put this plan on the back burner for now. I'll revisit it at weekend.
     

Share This Page