Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > Storage

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 01:51 PM
MarkOne's Avatar
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chertsey 60 KM north of Montreal
Posts: 4,015
Default

Because your controler do not fail

controler fail is the biggest cause of raid 5 faillure.

raid 5 have to be use with back-up , server replication etc.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
What did people say about RAID 5 that was bad?

.... it saved all my data for me....
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 01:55 PM
Perineum's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Surrey, B.C.
Posts: 4,026

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkOne View Post
Because your controler do not fail

controler fail is the biggest cause of raid 5 faillure.

raid 5 have to be use with back-up , server replication etc.

This is why I bought a card that I could replace if need be, not tied to a motherboard.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 01:56 PM
Perineum's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Surrey, B.C.
Posts: 4,026

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkOne View Post
1- You can use different size of drives, and don't loose space.
2- You can add a drive whenever you want
3- You duplicate only the folder you need
4- it's not dependent of a controller.
5- You can even use an external drive for the duplication
6- You can mix the JBOD and the Intel sata
7- No need to build the raid before install the os
8- A drive can be remove anytime

And many other that I forget

But it uses twice the space. If you have 4tb you want to keep, you need 8tb of storage....

or 5tb of RAID5
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 02:20 PM
MarkOne's Avatar
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chertsey 60 KM north of Montreal
Posts: 4,015
Default

ya but you was asking :::

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
how is it better than raid 1?

not raid 5

I have also 2 setup in raid 5 with card.. in my business location
I don't means in anything that duplication is better than raid 5 , I was comparing the WHS duplication with raid 1 , you have situations where raid 1 can be more useful too.
But for a server at home , even with double the quantity of drives, it can be advantageous, in some case where you want to add extra storage later. you do not need to have same size of disk.. take my WHS as example, for now I use a 250 gb for the system, and 2*640 black for storage. They are at 24% capacity, let say than next year Iím out of space and I canít find any $ 640, or even a better deal on 1.5 T, I just add them et voila.

And donít forget, you are computer literate ; itís not everyone who has the knowledge to deal with raid 5.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
But it uses twice the space. If you have 4tb you want to keep, you need 8tb of storage....

or 5tb of RAID5
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 02:22 PM
Jack Rabbit's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 784

My System Specs

Arrow level of redundancy

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
But it uses twice the space. If you have 4tb you want to keep, you need 8tb of storage....

or 5tb of RAID5
If you lose two drives from your five drive set everthying is gone. If MarkOne loses two dives he has lost maybe nothing and at most 1/4 of his data.

Neither is 'better' the are just suited to different applications.
__________________
He either fears his fate too much, or his deserts are small, that dares not put it to the touch, to gain or lose it all.
- James Graham
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 02:32 PM
MarkOne's Avatar
Banned
F@H
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Chertsey 60 KM north of Montreal
Posts: 4,015
Default

+1 ....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Rabbit View Post
......Neither is 'better' the are just suited to different applications.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 02:33 PM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 3,344
Default

The only main reason people go for a RAID 0 setup is performance, the speeds are blazing fast. In your case a RAID 1 or 5 would be suitable.

But it's a good argument to choose which RAID setup over the other one..
__________________
Intel E8400, Biostar TPower i45
G-Skill PC2-8500 4GB, Saphire HD4870 512mb
Cooler Master HAF 932, Enermax Galaxy DXX 1000W
Samsung 931BW 19" LCD, Logitech MX Revolution
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 02:44 PM
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Quebec
Posts: 137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
What did people say about RAID 5 that was bad?

.... it saved all my data for me....
I am aware that raid 5 has low writing speed (which i dont mind cause its for video storage) but, my motherboard cant use the raid 5, which is ok since its not the best idea when going so. I would have to buy a raid 5 controller which i think its too expensive unless you have a reliable inexpensive one! Some peoples have reported that it can fail quite often when you try rebuilding and you have to read disk that have bad sector.

Raid5 Questions:

If a disk fail, and the controller fail at remaking the failed disk. What happen to others disk? Are they still usable ? Will u lose only the data that was stored in the failed disk? From the wiki, it says i can lose 1 disk, then it start rebuilding the failed disk, but if it fail while rebuilding at reading some sector on other disk, the controller might think 2 disk failed and you lose the entire array. Can it fail at rebuilding a disk without destroying all the array?

What do you all think about it?
I appreciate all yours comments guys, keep it up!

Edit: Raid 1 mean you have a backup for every drive ? Alas, i've never had any drive fail to me. So i think having that much backup is overkill for me. Do Raid stress the disks more which cause the failure?

Thats why i thought at first, i would go for raid5, then i was affraid it wouldn't recover correctly. What do you think about it?

If i use green caviar, will raid make them spin all the time? Will they be able to slow down? If i watch a movie from a disk, are all 4 disk being read at the same time from raid 5?

I ask so many questions Thanks you for your answers

Last edited by slay3r; November 27, 2009 at 03:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 03:49 PM
Perineum's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Surrey, B.C.
Posts: 4,026

My System Specs

Default

In a RAID5, if you lose one disc your machine will still operate slowly. Your RAID won't fail at remaking a new drive to get the system up and running to full RAID5 again.

If you lose 2 HDs out of 3, you've lost everything.

RAID5 starts with 3 HDs to work.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Rabbit View Post
If you lose two drives from your five drive set everthying is gone. If MarkOne loses two dives he has lost maybe nothing and at most 1/4 of his data.
I plan on running RAID6 for myself.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old November 27, 2009, 03:59 PM
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Quebec
Posts: 137
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Perineum View Post
In a RAID5, if you lose one disc your machine will still operate slowly. Your RAID won't fail at remaking a new drive to get the system up and running to full RAID5 again.

If you lose 2 HDs out of 3, you've lost everything.

RAID5 starts with 3 HDs to work.



I plan on running RAID6 for myself.
Do you have to scan your disks often to check error so when you have to rebuild everything work fine?
What raid controller would you use/recommand? Are there more error margin with low cost controller? I guess so?

Do you recommand an external backup (NAS/DAS) with raid5? Would this cost as much as raid 1 mirroring?

Last edited by slay3r; November 27, 2009 at 04:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
raid 1+0 kyle_L Storage 3 October 18, 2009 02:38 PM
raid 51? bissa Storage 2 September 15, 2009 07:06 PM
Short Stroking and RAID Questions Toronto122 Storage 16 March 22, 2009 01:46 PM
ESata dual raid enclosure = poor man's hardware raid? sswilson Storage 10 May 6, 2008 09:58 AM
Raid Array Questions? Robscix Storage 13 December 5, 2007 02:59 PM