Faster Background or I/O task rate

gtghmgtghm New
edited October 2004 in Hardware
I'm using a 3ware 7500 IDE in Raid 0 under my settings options I have the option of chooseing either faster background task or faster I/O which option would be better?

The OS is XP Pro. My Raid 0 is does not include the OS, the OS is on a different disk.

Thanks,
"g"

Comments

  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited October 2004
    That probably relates to the speed or at least the priority it gives to rebuilding a failed drive in a redundant array

    In other words in raid-0 it on't matter

    Tex
  • Straight_ManStraight_Man Geeky, in my own way Naples, FL Icrontian
    edited October 2004
    So, choose faster I\O rate for RAID 0, yes. If things get unstable, deselect BOTH options and let card balance things for itself.

    0 is not redundant enough for a card to rebuild, its redundancy is at the volume level and mech level directly. You would need at least a four physical drive array for the card to be able to rebuild well automatically, two drives per array "Side" or "RAID Volume" set. 0 gives you each DRIVE of two total being its own integral VOLUME also. To recover from a RAID 0 failure, easiest first attempt way is to use good remaining drive.
  • TexTex Dallas/Ft. Worth
    edited October 2004
    For the love of gawd I can't even figure out the crap you just posted and I tune raid arrays for a living. Raid-0 is not redundant at all. It will not rebuild anything. You lose a drive and its gone. Thats why no buisness uses raid-0 for anything. Its a toy for home users mostly.

    The rebuild rate would refer to raid-5 for example. With raid-5 you can lose a drive and its able to rebuild the working array from the parity data. So you replace the failed drive or use a hot swap spare you had online and it starts rebuilding the array but the array is still accessible while it rebuilds. If the rebuild rate is high the disks are going to run slow for the users while the array is rebuilding. This is crtitcal in a server for example where the whole purpose of the raid-5 was keeping the data accessible no matter what. Personally I would rather get the thing rebuilt as fast as possible because untill its rebuilt your vulnerable if you were to lose another disk.
  • gtghmgtghm New
    edited October 2004
    Thanks guys I think I got it,

    "g"
Sign In or Register to comment.