Is 120GB X 2 RAID Overdoing it?

[x86]

Is having (2) 120GB WD Caviar HDD @ 7200RPM on RAID configuration overdoing it? Because that's what I have.

I just wanted some feedback.

 

[Wolfsraider]

drool

never lol

 

[Mavrick007]

Damn, that's alot of space! What is it being used for?
Hehe not overdoing it tho, I would if I could afford that..

 

[Orsorum]

Which RAID configuration? RAID 0 or 1?

Either way, it's tiiiiight. If you need the space, you need the space.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

i hope its RAID 1 (although i doubt it), or i hope you have ways of backing it up, cus if your raid array takes a crap or one of your hdd's do, you can say goodbye to that 240GB of stuff. (i would not trust an IDE RAID 0 array with anything important unless i was backing it up)

 

[JohnathanX]

I almost think that is overkill, but in about 1 year it wont be!

Thats pretty badass though! (I think your just trying to show off

 

[WyteWatt]

x86 curious are those the WD1200BB with 2 mb of cache or WD1200JB with 8 mb of cache HDs?

Please reply
Thanks

 

[x86]

I considered the fact that HDDs usually fill up in a year or two, so I planned for the future. They are set up using an integrated RAID controler, in RAID 0 configuration. (240GB @7200RPM : Drooool) These HDD are 2MB cache. If they were the SE 8MB, it would cost me about $250.00 more.

As for the price, I would like you to guess how much I paid for the HDDs.

-x86

 

[Superwormy]

PLEEEEASE tell me you have 240gb worth of tape backup for those drives??? That woudl be a horrible mess if one of the drives died with no backups :-(

 

[x86]

<< PLEEEEASE tell me you have 240gb worth of tape backup for those drives??? That woudl be a horrible mess if one of the drives died with no backups :-( >>



Funny... I have been thinking about that...

-x86

 

[Nocturnal]

I plan to pick up 2 IBM 120 GIGR's soon too.

I know IBM is suck, but hey, I like them, and I have two 60 gigr's right now.

Working pretty good.

 

[BigFatCow]

i can already see the post in the future Dammit!!!! i just lost 240gigs of stuff

 

[sharkeeper]

Yes, make sure you're backing up or putting nothing on there valuable!

The bigger they are, the harder they fall!


Cheers!

 

[Wolfsraider]

<< i can already see the post in the future Dammit!!!! i just lost 240gigs of stuff >>



I thought that it would be @$#%^ ibm %$#@ me they didn't say i couldn't run them for more than 2 weeks a month as the rma guy is trying to tell me now Here

man get the western digitals a much better deal IMHO


x86 smart move

 

[XMan]

That's a lot of pr0n.

What would be the best way to back that up? Even a DVD-burner only puts 4.7 gig on a disc.

 

[x86]

True true true. The options are to buy another set of 120GB drives, or set up a RAID 1 config.

-x86

 

[sharkeeper]

Reliable 100GB backup solutions (true backup solutions, not just copying to another HDD) are not cheap.

These are the best bang for the buck.

Cheers!

 

[WyteWatt]

I would be lucky if i filled up 20 gigs of the WD1200JB HD with 8 mb of cache. But i would not mind having the extra space just to have it plus the HD will be faster than a smaller HD with the same amount full. I may only fill up 5 to 15 gigs if even that hehe.

 

[mikable]

I see alot of people recomending a full 120gig backup and wonder why. Is all that 120gig filled up with "data," created by programs? I never backup my programs! just the data the the programs create. Saves alot of backup space. Yea, i created a CD of my operating system when it was freshly installed, and I re-create it whenever I make a hardware change. I make sure and keep all Install CD's in good condition!


Is it more important to backup a RAID 0 the it is a single disk? I mean if a solo 120gig disk system bites it the data is just as effectivly destroyed as a Raid 0, isn't it?

 

[GoSharks]

but if you are raid 0'ing 2 120gb disks, then you can stand to lose as much as 240 gb of data :Q

 

[DARRIN]

<< overdoing it? >>



That is not possible. Neither is overkill.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

<< I see alot of people recomending a full 120gig backup and wonder why. Is all that 120gig filled up with "data," created by programs? I never backup my programs! just the data the the programs create. Saves alot of backup space. Yea, i created a CD of my operating system when it was freshly installed, and I re-create it whenever I make a hardware change. I make sure and keep all Install CD's in good condition! >>


of course we're talking about data, not programs. divx, mp3's, pron, warez, that can fill up 240 gigs easy. 240GB of programs? come on.

ya should have gotten 4 60/80GB and did a RAID 5 or something. of course assuming you have bottomless pockets

 

[gnef]

hm.

if you don't already have the drives... but i think you said you did... but anwyays:

i think it would be better to do a four drive raid 0 array. the returns in speed should be much more noticable. And i also heard that doing software raid through windows it better than the software raid of the cards themselves such as the promise tx2/4.

so it should be cheaper and have better performance with four 60 gigs, which in the future if you wanted the redudancy, just recreate the array into raid 0 + 1, with the same space as the 120 gigs in raid one, but also the speed of raid 0 for less money, just a bit more heat, and two less spaces in your case.

But do realize this increases the risk of failure by a factor of two. (but with raid 0, which is what i think you are considering, that always seems to be an "acceptable" risk... heh...)

-Mel

 

[Amused]

<<

<< I see alot of people recomending a full 120gig backup and wonder why. Is all that 120gig filled up with "data," created by programs? I never backup my programs! just the data the the programs create. Saves alot of backup space. Yea, i created a CD of my operating system when it was freshly installed, and I re-create it whenever I make a hardware change. I make sure and keep all Install CD's in good condition! >>


of course we're talking about data, not programs. divx, mp3's, pron, warez, that can fill up 240 gigs easy. 240GB of programs? come on.

ya should have gotten 4 60/80GB and did a RAID 5 or something. of course assuming you have bottomless pockets >>



Um, isn't the minimum number of disks in a RAID 5 array 6?

 

[xylem]

I tried a software array with three drives in Win 2k. With my bus at 150 I kept losing the array, so I found a hacked bios to support 4 drives instead of 2 on the onboard raid controller. It has been more stable, but not perfect. I am curious, has anyone had a software array running under 2k or XP stably, and for a reasonable amount of time?