Software RAID
Okay, this crosses over into a windows question but it's basically about storage so I think it belongs here. I've been looking at various solutions for my storage problems, and the only thing that currently fits my cash flow (not very much) is a software RAID solution. I have a machine with 4 spare SATA slots, what I want to do is add 4 SATA drives and setup software RAID using windows server 2003. I realise performance isn't going to be anywhere near what I could achieve with hardware RAID, but I'm okay with that. So, a couple of questions:
1) Will my RAID volume be transferable? ie: if I want to move those 4 disks into another machine running server 2k3 will I have to start again or can I just put the disks into the new box and access my RAID volume no problem?
2) I'm 90% sure the answer to this will be no, but are software RAID volumes expandable? ie: if I start with 2 disks can I create my RAID volume then add more disks at a later date without reformatting the volume?
1) Will my RAID volume be transferable? ie: if I want to move those 4 disks into another machine running server 2k3 will I have to start again or can I just put the disks into the new box and access my RAID volume no problem?
2) I'm 90% sure the answer to this will be no, but are software RAID volumes expandable? ie: if I start with 2 disks can I create my RAID volume then add more disks at a later date without reformatting the volume?
0
Comments
Not necessarily true! Windows 2K/2K3 software raid is actually quite fast. It's faster than many "hardware" raid solutions.
There are two kinds of hardware raid cards. One is the one most of us are familiar with: on board or an add-in card from a vendor like Highpoint, SIIG, or Promise. Technically, those are just software raid, burned to a firmware chip, and not really any faster (sometimes slower) than software raid in Windows.
The other kind has an actual processor and RAM - these are true hardware RAID cards (AKA caching raid controllers). They usually start in the $300 range, but they have dedicated CPUs, ram, and batteries for memory backup. Those are indeed faster than software raid because they make intelligent cache decisions.
Point being, don't knock win2k3 software raid. It will be plenty fast for you.
I don't know - that's a really good question and one I've always wanted to know. If you figure it out, let me know!
Again not sure.. Let me know!
Number 2: 100 %No
software raid is harsh on system resorces and CPU power. especially raid5 which the CPU has to preform all of the parity calculations.
what kind of raid are u thinkging about, what kind of redundency? id really like to see you go for somthing a little better than software raid
1) Apparently you can transfer your array from one machine to another. as long as you have enough controllers / ports on the target machine to accomodate all the drives from the source machine it doesn't even matter which channel / port the drives are on. Linky
2) You can't expand arrays without destroying / recreating them. The only way to have volumes larger than a single disk with future expansion options is to dump RAID and go for dynamic volumes. This would allow you to have volumes spanned across multiple disks, and even mirrored volumes but doesn't give you any kind of performance increase.
3) I always put topics in the wrong area....this probably belongs in the windows area
Armo: I too would like to go for hardware RAID, but... the only hardware RAID cards I've seen with more than 4 ports are either PCI-X or PCI-E. The motherbopard I have for this system is an AGP/PCI board. SO to go for a hardware RAID solution would mean a new motherboard and possibly oher hardware before I even start pricing up a RAID card.
Why do you feel you need it?
What do you think you will gain from it?
1) I want some sort of future proofing in my system, in that I'd like to be able to expand whatever system I end up getting by adding more disks, without destroying what I already have...otherwise in a year or so I'll have the same problem I have now.
2) I'd like some sort of redundancy in my next system, since as I add more disks I'm going to start riding my luck with regards a disk failure. RAID 5 seems to be the optimum price / resiliance level for me.
3) I'd like the cheapest system I can get that will meet the above criteria.
Hardware I have available is a socket A system with my current RAID on the only available SATA ports (it's an Abit KT7-A board) and a socket 754 with 4 SATA ports free. I have literally no money available (still paying off credit for my opty
Another feature of a high quality card is that it would be "Hot Swappable". This means that if you loose a drive in RAID-5 or 10 you can swap out the bad drive with the rig running and keep all your data.
Jims running a raid 5 aray and he doesn't notice it eating up his resoruces.
Im only running a raid 1 aray in software but I never notice any cpu useage higher then 2%.
edit: Btw I will have 4X250's in software raid 5 in my server once I get some more cash and replace the dead cpu fan.
If on debian just type in
And well your at it you might as well get my faverate text editor.
Then set the config