RAID 0 Array on twin 80GB WD Special Ed. 8Meg Cache Drives

[Hessakia]

What should I have my stripe size set at on the above configuration?
i'm using the array as my main drive (OS and the whatnot) and i have an extra 80GB Maxtor Quite Drive for downloads and MP3s--any suggestions on Stripe Size and Partitions?


Hess.

 

[BigPotato]

^ 'cause iwanna know too

 

[Hessakia]

Well, it was a pain in the ass getting XP installed on it, but alas, i finally did it

I used the Highpoint intergrated RAID controller, and didn't install any drivers for it, but WinXP setup found it--but would only let me create a NTFS partition (this isn't what i want).

Anyone know how to convert to fat 32? or want to help me with repartitioning it?

thanks,
Hess

 

[FluxCapacitor]

Unfortunately, you cannot convert NTFS to FAT32... It's a one-way road.

I would recommend you use a DOS boot disk (Win98 boot disk works good for this), boot to a DOS prompt, partition your drive using fdisk (be sure to answer yes when it asks about large disk sizes) and then format it. Then you'll have a FAT32 partition that you can reinstall XP to.

Depends on what you want to use your RAID array for as to the stripe size. I use mine for gaming mostly and a 64k stripe size seems to work good. I also have a HighPoint controller.

 

[Hessakia]

well, i tried that old trick, hell i've been doing that for years (somethign like taht) but when i go to fdisk it, i dont see 160gb, i see soemthing smaller, something like 20 gigs

i dont understand, i think i'm going to recreate my RAID0, and then go to install off my98 disc, and let it parititon it, and then just reset and use the XP CD.

Kinda ghetto but i think it will work.


hess.

 

[FluxCapacitor]

but when i go to fdisk it, i dont see 160gb, i see soemthing smaller, something like 20 gigs

Don't worry about that. It's just a glitch with DOS. It will still format the entire 160GB.... Trust me. It does the same thing with my 80GB array.

 

[shathal]

Several things:

1: Stripesize

Doesn't really matter. 64K is a good average, and I'd stick to the default. Unless you've got a www-server or so, you'd hardly need a Stripe-size of 4K or thereabouts. Stripesize isn't really anymore a "big deal" as it used to be. Just stick with the defaults.

2: Win 9x / Fdisk and large HD's

You might want to look at this:

Win 9X FDISK doesn't support HD's bigger than 60 GB really (another reason to use W2K / XP). and W2K doesn't support HD's that big natively short of SP 3.

48-bit LBA support for Windows

You might also want to upgrade your mobo's BIOS - if that can support 48-bit LBA drives natively, you've got fewer headaches. Otherwise, you will need something like Intel's IAA (Intel Application Accelerator) as a storage driver (*IF* you have an Intel chipset) that should help you out with HD's bigger than 137 GB's when using W2K or XP. Win 9X is not accounted for in any way.

If you want to use "large" Hd's and Win 9X be able to access it, you'll just have to create a smaller Fat-32 partition. .

Hope this helps.

- Shathal.

 

[FluxCapacitor]

Hey shathal, how's it going?

Where did you get that info about 9x not supporting larger than 60GB drives? I'm not sure you're correct.

I've used fdisk to partition my 80GB RAID array and have used it to partition large drives for other people as well. I've never had a problem yet.

 

[Hessakia]

i'll try my 98 disc/FDISK again when i reformat this weekend, from what i hear, a FAT32 RAID0 stripe is about 30% faster than NTFS, and NTFS is a bitch to get rid of, from my past experiences... so i'll jsut recreate my Stripe, use 64k size (which i think i did anyhow, havne't had time to look) i'll let you guys know whats up

it takes like 5 seconds or so from the time the starting windows xp screen comes up until i'm at the desktop... i'm very impressed


Hess.