RAID 0 - Stripe Size For Best All Around Performance?

[-JJ-]

Hi there,

I am about to create a RAID 0 array with 2 (two) WD6400AAKS hdd's on ASUS P5K-E WIFI/AP (ICHR9) motherboard..

The plan is to create 1st slice with 300gb and second 2nd slice with all remaining space.

Most of the data are small files with size ~5mb-6mb.

What stripe size should I chose in order to get the best all around performance? 64kb ? I am particularly interested in fastest possible boot times. The operating system shalll be WinXP Pro.

Is it right that the smaller the stripe size the better the boot performance?


Will it make a difference, if I decide to create a RAID 0 without having no slices, just one large RAID 0 consisting of two WD6400AAKS hdd's, instead of having two slices (300gb/900gb).

Well, sure that hdtune and hdtach will give much better results on the smaller slice (lower accestimes and higher read/write mb/s) if I make one smaller slice and one larger, however will it (slicing or no slicing) affect boot times / app load times differ ?

If "slicing" is essential, than what should the maximum amount for the smaller slice?

Would it be fine, if make it like this:

Slice No.1 - 300gb,
Slice No.2 - 900gb,

?

[tuskenraider]

I've tested various stripe sizes with various RAID controllers and I haven't found any from 16K-128K to make any difference in boot, program launch, etc. I'd go with the default 64K. Even if there was a benefit to be had, I'd be too small and too difficult to measure. As far as "slicing", if you're just trying to make a smaller space to cram your files into, just partition it. No need to make two RAID arrays of the same type just for that.

[dudleycpa]

Tusken is right on the money for this.

300GB for a RAID 0 doesn't make a lot of sense. If either drive dies you'll lose your data.

Why not just keep the two hard drives as two different volumes (I.E. drive C and drive D).

[nd4spdbh2]

i run 128k on my matrix raid 0 array... thats the recommended from intel.

[stereo555]

Ive used 128k for years , as its a nice number/performance for my usage ... gaming ,movie decoding/copying etc .

[aoch88]

Here is my setup:

50GB Slice 1, 32K stripe size (boot partition)
260GB Slice 2, 128K stripe size

When I bench using HD Tach, the 50GB slice gives a better seek time and average read compared to the other slice. My guess is that we should put a smaller size for the boot partition and specify a smaller stripe size.

[-JJ-]

Here is my setup:

50GB Slice 1, 32K stripe size (boot partition)
260GB Slice 2, 128K stripe size

When I bench using HD Tach, the 50GB slice gives a better seek time and average read compared to the other slice. My guess is that we should put a smaller size for the boot partition and specify a smaller stripe size.

aoch88 could please try and move one file (~1gb) from Slice 1 to Slice 2 ? J

See the thing that cracks me up is the “cooperation” between slices in Intel Matrix Raid. For instance, copying a certain file from Slice to Slice takes much more longer time than it does in a non raid mode from one HDD to other HDD. You know what I am sayin’? Even copying from “slice” to USB flash drive is faster.

I remember first having two Caviar RE2 500gb in Intel Matrix Raid with slice no.1 – 100gb, and slice no. 2 – 900gb. Well If I had to move/copy files from no.1 to no. 2 or other way around it would take me forever, and that is the reason why I am thinking of having RAID 0 without no slices at all.

Data loss is not an issue. I have had raid 0 for years and never had any issues of data loss. Moreover I backup all of my important data.

[aoch88]

To be honest, I've never copied a huge file of about 1GB in size but I've tried backing up my data of about 70GB+ from my RAID0 volume to a portable USB hard disk and it takes 15-20 mins max.

As for copying data from one slice to another, I'd give it a try later and let you know. From my experience, copying a small folder is blazingly fast as compared to a normal single drive non-raid.

I remember there's a site which does some comparison on the stripe size (was it hardwaresecrets or something?) and 32-64K should be a good number.

[MadMan007]

aoch88 could please try and move one file (~1gb) from Slice 1 to Slice 2 ? J

See the thing that cracks me up is the “cooperation” between slices in Intel Matrix Raid. For instance, copying a certain file from Slice to Slice takes much more longer time than it does in a non raid mode from one HDD to other HDD. You know what I am sayin’? Even copying from “slice” to USB flash drive is faster.

I remember first having two Caviar RE2 500gb in Intel Matrix Raid with slice no.1 – 100gb, and slice no. 2 – 900gb. Well If I had to move/copy files from no.1 to no. 2 or other way around it would take me forever, and that is the reason why I am thinking of having RAID 0 without no slices at all.

Data loss is not an issue. I have had raid 0 for years and never had any issues of data loss. Moreover I backup all of my important data.

You're still copying from the same drives to the same drives in a case like that so it makes sense that it might be slower than twoo separate drives.

[-JJ-]

results: http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=5593909&postcount=1485 and http://www.ocforums.com/showpost.php?p=5611525&postcount=1493