For RAID,Can it work?? two HD's in one case

[eff86]

I was thinking about RAID HD's a couple hrs. ago and an idea occured to me that cannot be right, or it would already have been done.
I hope that someone can tell me why it will not work.
This is my idea:
Instead of buying TWO 40GB HD's to configure in a RAID configuration; why can't the same job be accomplished with ONE 80GB HD??
As I understand it 40GB can be put on a single platter, an 80GB drive would then have two platters in it. Each has its own read/write head, and if the wiring to them is designed properly, couldn't each head be considered as a seperate
40GB HD?????? The only thing I can think of that is NOT independent is their drive, they spin in unison, but that shouldn't hurt anything should it?
If this could be done it seems that one 80GB HD should cost less than two 40GB ones, the case heat buildup should be less, and a drive bay would be freed up, etc etc. All multiple platter HD's could be made with a user option, (-sw.-jumper-bios-) that would allow RAID or NORMAL configuration.
Wouldn't THAT be nice, you could run an A-B test on the spot with no additional purchases and determine how effective RAID was in your set-up!!
Appoligize for length of this post, will keep them shorter in the future.
Please tell me where I headed out into La-La land.
Thnx
eff86

 

[RainMaQer]

Well... Simple reason why it won't work. You can't hook a second IDE channel up to that ONE HD. The raid setup works by sending info to 2 drives simultaneously. The data is split between them. This means that with a file that is 100 MB in size, 50 goes down one channel and 50 down the other. This is where the real speed comes in to play with a RAID setup. This of course is done with Stripping. The fact that there is 2 drives isn't the real factor... it's how the data is transfered down the two channels rather than one. So a instead of ATA66 for instance you would get 2X ATA66.

With a Mirroring setup... using only one HD would be pointless. If the drive fails... all data is lost. Whether there is 2 platters to that drive or not. Mirroring is done so that in case a drive fails data is not lost in a time consuming way.

 

[eff86]

Sounds like the problem is with data transfer. If this were to work this problem would have to be solved. Thanx for the info.

 

[Sonny]

I guess this is the extension of the PM. Well RAID really means Redundant Array of Independent Disks. The first idea for RAID was to really expand storage capacity & have some form of securing data realtime from possible hardware failure. So the idea is to have seperate HDDs.

In your PM you mentioned your fear of mechanical failure in which I suggested RAID1 for Data Security. If you loose a HDD in RAID0 you will lose all Data on both HDDs. I also noticed a concern on heat issues. How high are your ambient temps?

 

[eff86]

Have no heat issue now, for am running my old low temp. system, K-6. Any heat probs. will occur after I upgrade.
You are right, RAID was initially designed to increase data security, but that was then.
Now with the internet, and on-line gaming becoming very popular, speed is more important than it ever has been. Hopefully they will redesign the data transfer paths so that
RAID-0 can be packaged in a single case.
Am sure that the market exists for it!!!

 

[Big Mike]

Keep in mind the current mechanics of disks make this point moot anyways, the drive writes to all platters and reads from all platters at the same time in the same area, ie the heads are all mounted to the same armature and move in synch and write/read in synch, basically internally drives are already acting like a raid setup...if it wasnt cost prohibitive they could probably add more platters to existing drives to speed them up...

 

[Captain Slug]

Hehehehe, I thought this was an issue of space inside your computer when I read the title.
You could buy 2 slimline Notebook Hard Drive and adapters and fit 2 (maybe 3) hard drives in the space that a standard IDE HDD would take up.

But don't mind me I'm ranting because I'm working on a really small computer...

 

[MadMan007]

sorry to sound harsh, but if RAID performance were obtainable from one drive as easily as you think, I believe the drive manufacturers would already have done it. I mean, the engineers there do this for a living.

Plus, AFAIK, as said earlier, the different heads read off the different platters already. I think the heads actually move independently on each platter though. In other words, the head on platter 1 can be aligned differently from the head on platter 2. Then the data from platter 2 would not have to wait for the data on platter 1 to be done reading.