what would you do, as far as raid ?

[gborrillo]

you have 4 10k 150g raptors. best possible setup?

[CGR]

Use one for OS/games and the other three in a raid 5 setup for storage.

[jason4207]

Matrix RAID0/5.

Take 20-30GB slice from each drive for RAID0 (OS/Programs), and RAID5 (Data) the rest. Backup the RAID0 image on the RAID5 array for quick recovery in case of a single HDD failure.

[tuskenraider]

you have 4 10k 150g raptors. best possible setup?Assuming speed, 2 RAID0 arrays. Otherwise, use dependant. Oh, and Matrix won't make them any faster.

[jason4207]

Assuming speed, 2 RAID0 arrays. Otherwise, use dependant. Oh, and Matrix won't make them any faster.

I'm not sure about real-world, but benches show improved STR and seek times when you slice out the fastest part of the disks when using the Matrix.

What are you basing your statement on?

[tuskenraider]

I'm not sure about real-world, but benches show improved STR and seek times when you slice out the fastest part of the disks when using the Matrix.

What are you basing your statement on? I've explained this many times here, so cliff notes: Obviously, the hard drive doesn't physically go any faster just because you made a small array. A partiition does the same thing(can't benchmark a partition though, which means you can't show your e-penis here). Any third party defragmenter will put the files at the outside of the platter with or without a small array or partition and is actually the best/fastest method of file placement. Matrix RAID is for implementing two different types of arrays with limited drives(2). Using it for file compression was never its intention and is certainly not the best method. :beer:

[gborrillo]

so tuskenraider,

what is the difference between a raid 0 with 4 drives, as opposed to 2 raid 0s? i am using an adaptec 4 port controller btw.

[tuskenraider]

so tuskenraider,

what is the difference between a raid 0 with 4 drives, as opposed to 2 raid 0s? i am using an adaptec 4 port controller btw.Getting off topic, but the difference is almost double the sustained transfer rate(STR) with doubling the drives and a small drop in access times. If your use demands high transfer rates, it'll be beneficial, for the average desktop user, it will give you nothing over a two drive setup but a lighter wallet.

[gborrillo]

Cool, thanks again. So OS and apps would go on either of these 2 raids, and data would be on a separate drive, correct?

[youngbuck]

4 drive RAID 5

[JCLW]

I have four 74G Raptors, and am running RAID 10 - fast and secure.

Kind of expensive in terms of $/GB, that's all.

[Jhonas]

Sell them all, get an ssd for the os and programs, and the the biggest storage possible with the change after that....
or
1 for the os and programs, raid 0 the rest for essential data such as files and pictures, get a big drive for the rest, eg music and misc.

[Deanzo]

Two raid zeros gets my vote if using the 4 drives listed.

[DaPoets]

why 2 raid0's?? what will be the benifit of having 2 raid0's over having just one? Also does saved data really need the boost in speed from a raid0 over the speed and redundancy of a raid5? I like the raid0/raid5 idea and that's what I'm doing right now....

[tuskenraider]

why 2 raid0's?? what will be the benifit of having 2 raid0's over having just one? Also does saved data really need the boost in speed from a raid0 over the speed and redundancy of a raid5? I like the raid0/raid5 idea and that's what I'm doing right now....Well there really isn't one answer to the OP's question as it is pretty generic, but two RAID0's will give only a very small hit in access times and great transfer speeds between the arrays. RAID5's write speeds are pretty poor compared to RAID0. Each has it's place of course.

[jason4207]

I still think Matrix RAID0/5 will give you the best performance/redundancy value. 4 drive RAID0 portion w/ a small Matrix slice will give you incredible STR, and seek times. The RAID5 will be faster than a single drive, and you won't lose all your data if a HDD fails.

And if you image the RAID0 array onto the RAID5 w/ software you can have a full recovery up in minutes if 1 HDD fails. *assuming you perform regular back-ups.

[VinnyTAMU]

With four hard drives I am really a fan of a RAID 10 (1+0) setup.

You get the read speeds of a four disc RAID 0 and the redundancy of a RAID 1 setup. That is how I would go if I had four discs.

[DaPoets]

nah you only get 50% of the storage usage in a raid 10 solution.

[johan851]

You get the read speeds of a four disc RAID 0 and the redundancy of a RAID 1 setup. That is how I would go if I had four discs.
You get the read speeds of a two disc RAID 0 array, you mean.

[JCLW]

nah you only get 50% of the storage usage in a raid 10 solution.

Drives are cheap.

[bing]

gborrillo, I think you haven't mention what is your "typical" usage on this rig ? Is it just for gaming ? Media streaming ? Server for file ? or for database ? and etc.

This is important for us in "suggesting" the best combination for you instead of guessing. :D

Also the other important missing info is what type/model of Adaptec controller is that ? PCI ? PCIE ?

[jason4207]

I didn't realize you're using an Adaptec controller.

Bing has an excellent point. For me Matrix RAID0/5 would be best. I'd just sell that Adaptec to help pay for the drives. Your needs may be different than mine, though, so we need some more input.