To talk on Icrontic, just register!

It only takes 30 seconds.

Have an account? Sign in:

Forgot?
 
Reply to Discussion Options
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 1:32am

Question RAID 5 or RAID 0+1 and other questions...

I'm going to get a Highpoint RocketRAID404 from NewEgg to use with my 4 120 GB WD JBs. I'm trying to find a RAID solution that gives me the maximum performance with data reliability and redundancy. Reading the numerous articles from Anandtech, Tom's, and Short-Media, I still haven't been able to see a discernable difference from a 4 Drive array in RAID 0+1 or RAID 5, other than RAID 5 should give me more available space. The array will have my OS, applications, and my data storage as well.

I'm looking for any recommendations or tips that could help me decide. Which one is better? Is there another option I'm missing?
Any advice on whether the HP RR 404 is the card of choice for this setup? Thanks!

Preacher
Reply with Quote
edcentric
Must keep folding
edcentric
2,481 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 2:10am
I have used both, but never set them up.
4 120's in 0+1 will give you 240 usable.
3 120's in r5 will give you 240 usable.
5 120's in r5 will give you 480 usable.
The 404 won't do raid 5, will it?
I don't know of any reason why the speed would be different.
If you have the four drives, and you can get a 404 at a good price, then go for it. It will be fast.
__________________ A couple of folding boxes;

DFI LP Nf4 U-D, A64X2, 2GB ram, is folding again
MSI P965 Pt, C2D E6300, 2GB ram, old reliable

2.5 million points and counting
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 2:34am
I thought the same thing about the 404 not being RAID 5 capable, but according to HP's website the new BIOS/drivers make it available.

http://www.highpoint-tech.com/rr404.htm
Reply with Quote
a2jfreak
madasiemanym
a2jfreak
3,351 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 3:59am
RAID 0+1, RAID 10. pretty much the same thing, right?

0+1 would be a RAID 0 array of RAID 1.

10 would be a RAID 1 array of RAID 0.

Correct? Is there any advantage to setting up one rather than the other?


As for RAID 0+1 vs RAID 5.
RAID 5 will yield ever increasing HD space as HDs are added, where 0+1 will always require 2 HDs to gain the space of 1. I think I'd go w/ RAID 5, unless RAID 0+1 gives higher performance and you don't need the extra capacity.
__________________
One thing kids like is to be tricked. For instance, I was going to take my little nephew to Disneyland, but instead I drove him to an old burned-out warehouse. "Oh, no," I said. "Disneyland burned down." He cried and cried, but I think that deep down, he thought it was a pretty good joke. I started to drive over to the real Disneyland, but it was getting pretty late.
Jack Handey
[folding_sig1]Child Search Ministries.
A Christian Charity for Missing Children.

Get Firefox!
Reply with Quote
primesuspect
The Icrontic Guy
primesuspect
28,248 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 4:25am
Whoa! RAID 5 is gonads slower than RAID 10... It's like this:

RAID 5: little more capacity, but a HUGE penalty on writes

RAID 10: less capacity, but a HUGE speed increase over 5

It's NOT an insignificant performance difference, either. It's major. Search around for some Attos with 5 and 10.
__________________ "I offer my genius to the world, all I ask is you pick up my expenses"
Reply with Quote
a2jfreak
madasiemanym
a2jfreak
3,351 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 6:36am
gonads slower?

Hmmm.
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 7:12am
Can I get a quantitative definition of "gonads slower?" Well, digging a little deeper into the RAID underbelly of the net. I found several articles that state RAID 5 is only 10% slower than RAID 0. On a 3Ware Escalade, Tom's Hardware said that the RAID 0 and RAID 5 results where 56,800 and 56,750 Kbytes per second respectively.

"RAID Level 5 is generally considered the best compromise between data security and performance. Not only the data, but also the parity information, is distributed to all the existing drives. The resulting advantage is that RAID is really only a bit slower than RAID 3. However, failure safety is limited, as only one hard drive can safely crash. At least three hard drives are required in each case. "
- Tom's Hardware

"RAID Level 5 dominates in today's high-end server segment. If you're using four to seven drives, such an array is a real performer and, if the drives are large, allows accordingly large partitions. Unlike RAID 3, the parity data are integrated in the stripes on all drives and are distributed in a way that will have a positive impact on performance. Consequently, RAID 5 offers a high level of performance for all kinds of applications. "
- Tom's Hardware

"RAID - Number of drives - Data security - Availability - Capacity - Performance - Cost
5 - 3+ - satisfactory - good - (x-1) / x - good - medium
0+1 - 4,6,8... - good - good - 50% - good - medium"
- Tom's Hardware

"RAID 5 does provide a good balance between speed and reliability and is a popular configuration for arrays in a variety of systems, from serves to workstations. The data security made possible with the parity bit as well as the speed and space provided by RAID 5 have many high-end system builders turning to RAID 5."
-Anandtech

Now with all that being said, Anandtech sums up the gonad discussion here:

"As we can see, RAID 5 should be strictly reserved in cases where data integrity is of the utmost importance. It does offer advantages over a RAID 1 solution, as the array makes use of more hard drive space and has extra capabilities that RAID 1 can not offer. But with the rather noticeable performance hit that RAID 5 incurs, this RAID type is best left for servers with critical data but not much need for speed."

http://www.anandtech.com/storage/sho...ml?i=1491&p=26

It looks like you are ABSOLUTELY correct, primesuspect. According to Anandtech's numbers, a single IDE drive beats multiple drives in RAID 5.
Reply with Quote
primesuspect
The Icrontic Guy
primesuspect
28,248 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 7:20am
Yes, or in layman's terms, gonads slower.
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 7:50am
Didn't the Great Buddha say something similar in his day....

"Aware among the thoughtless, awake among the sleepy,
the wise advances, like a racehorse leaves behind those of slow gonads.
By awareness Indra rose to become chief of the gods.
People praise awareness; thoughtlessness is always blamed."

I guess even Motor City needs some Buddhists wise in the ways of RAID.

Thanks.
Reply with Quote
Geeky1
No comment.
Geeky1
7,972 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 7:51am
Preach, you may want to pass on the RocketRaid 404. Why? It's a 32 bit, 33MHz card... you're gonna bottleneck you're PCI bus like you wouldn't believe with 4 JBs on that thing... I'd recommend what I'm running instead- a rocketraid 1540 4 channel SATA RAID controller... I bought the version that comes with the 4 rockethead 100s from http://www.xpcgear.com/

Since it's a 32-bit, 66MHz card, if you ever upgrade to a board that supports 66MHz cards (dual athlons/xeons, etc.) you'll get 266MB/s out of it maximum, and in doing so, you'll eliminate the bottleneck. And, it's backwards compatible with 32-bit/33MHz slots...
__________________ -MCCCXXXVII
"Ignorance is forgivable. Stupidity is inexcusable."

Resident Dual CPU Addict: 3 working duallies, 2 more in the parts drawer, and looking to add an Opteron dually to that list as soon as I can find a good motherboard...
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 8:19am
Hmmmm....interesting. I'm having trouble concentrating. I'd swear that girl in your sig keeps winking at me.

I would still need to buy 4 SATA cables, though. Is there any speed increase or just the upgradeability factor?
Reply with Quote
TheLostSwede
Where's the ****ing beers?
TheLostSwede
3,220 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 11:38am
From what i have seen on my 2 80 gigs wd se, raid 0 on the sata controller with the adaptors gives slightly faster performance then on the standard ide or the ide raid controller i have tested.

That may be different on another chipset/mobo though.
When you buy the adapters, you get the cable as well.

4 drives in raid 0 will saturate the pci bus though, but why not run 2 of them in raid 0 for Os,proggs, games etc and the other 2 for temp files, swapfile and storage? Create a small partition for the os and ghost it on one of the storage drives and/or burn it on a few cds. Fool proof setup.
__________________ ...
Reply with Quote
primesuspect
The Icrontic Guy
primesuspect
28,248 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 2:45pm
Actually Preach, I think the passage you are talking about was the Four Noble Truths of Storage:

1) Humans with computers will always be suffering
2) Humans with computers suffer because they want their computers to be better
3) RAID 5 is gonads slower than RAID 10
4) You can break the cycle of suffering by throwing your computer through the damned window

or something like that.... It got a bit chewed up in translation from Pali....
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 4:21pm
Yeah, that's it! I have seen if referred to in computer publications as important to PCs as Moore's Law. Doesn't Western Digital have it secretly engraved on their hard drive platters?

Mackanz,
thanks for the tips. I wasn't planning on putting 4 drives in RAID 0. The options I was considering, because I value performance as well as data backup was RAID 0+1 or RAID 5. With primesuspect's help, I've eliminated RAID 5. That leaves RAID 0+1. I've already bought the 404 and I don't plan on upgrading to a 66Mhz board for a LONG while so I think I'll stick with it.
Reply with Quote
Geeky1
No comment.
Geeky1
7,972 Posts
28 Jul 2003, 4:46pm
Preacher said
[b]Hmmmm....interesting. I'm having trouble concentrating. I'd swear that girl in your sig keeps winking at me.


I've already bought the 404 and I don't plan on upgrading to a 66Mhz board for a LONG while so I think I'll stick with it.
In that case, the 404 should be more than adequate.
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

28 Jul 2003, 6:17pm
Geeky1 said
[b]
Preacher said
Hmmmm....interesting. I'm having trouble concentrating. I'd swear that girl in your sig keeps winking at me.




I've already bought the 404 and I don't plan on upgrading to a 66Mhz board for a LONG while so I think I'll stick with it.
In that case, the 404 should be more than adequate.
I think the girl in your Sig is more than adequate as well. Seriously, I do appreciate everyone's recommendations.
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
29 Jul 2003, 2:23pm
Geeky1 said
Preach, you may want to pass on the RocketRaid 404. Why? It's a 32 bit, 33MHz card... you're gonna bottleneck you're PCI bus like you wouldn't believe with 4 JBs on that thing... I'd recommend what I'm running instead- a rocketraid 1540 4 channel SATA RAID controller... I bought the version that comes with the 4 rockethead 100s from http://www.xpcgear.com/

Since it's a 32-bit, 66MHz card, if you ever upgrade to a board that supports 66MHz cards (dual athlons/xeons, etc.) you'll get 266MB/s out of it maximum, and in doing so, you'll eliminate the bottleneck. And, it's backwards compatible with 32-bit/33MHz slots...

But your 1540 isnt 32bit/66mhz either bud. The only controller from Highpoint thats 66mhz capable is the 1520. The adds on websites all say 66mhz but highpoints site says 33mhz. I just got an email back from HPT support and they confirmed its a 33 mhz board.

I just got one of the 1540's with the four ide to sata converters yesterday................. for 50 bucks including shipping..... I think I could sell the four converters for more then that.

Tex
Reply with Quote
Tex edited : 29 Jul 2003 at 2:25pm .
Geeky1
No comment.
Geeky1
7,972 Posts
29 Jul 2003, 4:54pm
Wonderful. Strange that HighPoint's site claimed that it was a 66MHz card up until a few days/weeks ago then... oh well...
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
29 Jul 2003, 5:05pm
Maybe thats why all the resellers on the entire web show it as a 66mhz card also. Sandra will tell you if the card is 66mhz capable.

Here is the long detailed email I received from them after I emailed asking why all the resellers listed the 1540 as 66mhz capable and their site did not... You may want to go raise hell with them claiming you only bought THAT card because their site had claimed it was 66mhz capable a few weeks ago.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

Thank you for contacting us!
The RocketRAID 1540 is 32bit, 33MHz PC . The RocketRAID 1520 is 32bit, 33MHz/66MHz PC .

Regards,
HighPoint Technologies, Inc.
__________________ Never knock on deaths door.

Just ring the bell and run..... he hates that
Reply with Quote
Geeky1
No comment.
Geeky1
7,972 Posts
29 Jul 2003, 5:26pm
Tex... Which module would I look under in Sandra? I can't seem to find it...
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
29 Jul 2003, 5:33pm
The one that covers the PCI/AGP card bus. You can sorta scroll thru the differant devices on each pci bus and in the details it lists if its 66mhz capable. You probably got to have it in a 66mhz slot but maybe not.

Tex
Reply with Quote
edcentric
Must keep folding
edcentric
2,481 Posts
29 Jul 2003, 6:57pm
Preach, you are going to post the ATTO scores when you get it running, right?
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

30 Jul 2003, 1:38am
edcentric,
I'll happily do that. I think I'm going to go with the RAID 0+1 option, unless anyone can think of a better option.

What are the standard ATTO settings to use? Any suggestions on tweaking and stripe size are HIGHLY welcome!
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
30 Jul 2003, 3:32am
On atto just change the total lenghth to 32 and use 16/16 for stripe and cluster
Reply with Quote
Preacher
Contentious Cajun of the Cloth
Preacher
1,220 Posts

» Subscriber

30 Jul 2003, 4:24am
Graci!
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
30 Jul 2003, 4:30pm
Geeky1 said
Wonderful. Strange that HighPoint's site claimed that it was a 66MHz card up until a few days/weeks ago then... oh well...
He overnighted me that 1540 I just bought?? WTF?? he included shipping OVERNIGHT for free???

I paid 50 bucks for this thing and it includes the four sata to ide converters also. I mean Huh???

And if its any consolation Geeky.... I have the box for this sucker in my hand and it clearly states its 32bit/66mhz capable. Sorta explains why every website advertises it also as 66mhz capable I suppose.

I will slap this sucker in a 64/66mhz slot here in a second and see what sandra says anyway.

Tex
Reply with Quote
Tex edited : 30 Jul 2003 at 4:37pm .
Geeky1
No comment.
Geeky1
7,972 Posts
30 Jul 2003, 4:52pm
Tex... nice deal! ebay again? I'd buy more stuff on ebay if I could, but I'm 16, so I can't register myself, and it's not always easy to talk my dad into bidding on "more computer stuff" for me
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
30 Jul 2003, 5:01pm
I hardly buy anything not on ebay anymore. Just bought a pair of coppermine 1.0 Celerons and the slocket converters to upgrade a dual CPU SGI motherboard I got for free.. I mean some of these deals are outrageous? I bet this controller with the converters has to run $125 easy and with free overnight shipping I must of only paid 40 bucks max for the thing and its all new in the box? I mean WTF ??
tex
Reply with Quote
Tex
Tex Support
Tex
4,130 Posts
30 Jul 2003, 8:30pm
Geeky: Just to further screw your thought process.... sandra says the card IS 66mhz capable. The box says it is. But HPT says its not.... WTF??

tex
Reply with Quote
Go Back   Icrontic Forums > Tech: Hardware > Storage
Reload this Page RAID 5 or RAID 0+1 and other questions...
Jump to
This Thread Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Today's Posts - Mark All Read - Contact Us - Icrontic.com - Archive - Top

Current time: 2:31pm (GMT)
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Get Vanilla instead. Trust me.