HardwareBanter

HardwareBanter (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/index.php)
-   General (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=28)
-   -   SATA drive questions + raid questions (http://www.hardwarebanter.com/showthread.php?t=1413)

O |V| 3 G A September 23rd 03 02:30 PM

SATA drive questions + raid questions
 
hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper



Mike Walsh September 23rd 03 02:57 PM


The 10,000 RPM drives are built for speed; great for OS and applications but not big enough for serious data storage. You will have to settle for a 7200 RPM drive.

O |V| 3 G A wrote:

hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper


--
Mike Walsh
West Palm Beach, Florida, U.S.A.

JT September 23rd 03 03:15 PM

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:30:25 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper

WD just introduced their 73gb 10k rpm Raptors. If they are anything like
the 36gb ones, they will be very fast. Put one in a DB server which needed
the speed and it is outstanding in performance. (Having a gig of ram, dual
channel DDR helps as well). If you need speed, these are as fast as it gets
without SCSI

O |V| 3 G A September 23rd 03 05:10 PM

exactly why i want one of the 10k raptors. tomshardware.com did a comparison
on it, with the 36gb drive and it beat all but the maxtor SCSI u320 10k.6
drive (including other scsi u320 drives)

looks like nowhere sells the 73gb yet (scan, dabs, komplett or ebuyer) but
hopefully by the time i get some money and decide i want to invest in RAID
SATA then there might be somewhere that sells it.

atm, i`m looking at 2x maxtor 120gb SATA 7200rpm with 8mb cache. 2nd best to
the raptor.

tim
"JT" datacare@localhost wrote in message
s.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:30:25 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping

scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill

i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper

WD just introduced their 73gb 10k rpm Raptors. If they are anything like
the 36gb ones, they will be very fast. Put one in a DB server which needed
the speed and it is outstanding in performance. (Having a gig of ram, dual
channel DDR helps as well). If you need speed, these are as fast as it

gets
without SCSI




O |V| 3 G A September 23rd 03 05:12 PM

another thing i didnt ask - with a RAID1 (striping) setup, if 1 drive goes
down (ie, faulty drive) does it take the other HDD with it for some reason?
or can i simply remove the faulty HDD, and revert back to a straight SATA
setup, with the 2nd good drive ?

tim
"JT" datacare@localhost wrote in message
s.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:30:25 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping

scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill

i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper

WD just introduced their 73gb 10k rpm Raptors. If they are anything like
the 36gb ones, they will be very fast. Put one in a DB server which needed
the speed and it is outstanding in performance. (Having a gig of ram, dual
channel DDR helps as well). If you need speed, these are as fast as it

gets
without SCSI




O |V| 3 G A September 23rd 03 10:51 PM

doh - should of been RAID0 (striping) - i was wrongly informed which was
mirroring and which was striping.

tim
"O |V| 3 G A" wrote in message
...
another thing i didnt ask - with a RAID1 (striping) setup, if 1 drive goes
down (ie, faulty drive) does it take the other HDD with it for some

reason?
or can i simply remove the faulty HDD, and revert back to a straight SATA
setup, with the 2nd good drive ?

tim
"JT" datacare@localhost wrote in message
s.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:30:25 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough)

and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache

SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping

scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a

later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while

untill
i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive

and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper

WD just introduced their 73gb 10k rpm Raptors. If they are anything like
the 36gb ones, they will be very fast. Put one in a DB server which

needed
the speed and it is outstanding in performance. (Having a gig of ram,

dual
channel DDR helps as well). If you need speed, these are as fast as it

gets
without SCSI






kony September 23rd 03 11:48 PM

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 21:51:42 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

doh - should of been RAID0 (striping) - i was wrongly informed which was
mirroring and which was striping.



When one of the RAID 0 drives fails, the whole array is lost, no
possible way to recover UNLESS you get the same drive working again.

It would seem that you're trying to make a giant step in HDD usage
when what you really should do first is just buy a normal, larger 7K2
drive, and gain some background knowledge & experience using arrays,
BEFORE you need depend on one. RAID 0 arrays are a nice compliment to
already-adequate storage space but not a suitable replacement for it.

Since your system supports SATA you might go ahead and purchase an
SATA drive, but if you buy only one you will have to re-FDISK and
format when you add the second drive (later) to form the RAID 0 array.
Meaning, you need enough storage space on _other_ drives to backup all
that data first, unless you want to reinstall everything again,
including the OS. By making the backup you will not need to reinstall
the OS, just dupe the backup to the new array.


Dave

JAD September 23rd 03 11:52 PM

SATA is pretty new and will develop with time.....why not SCSI? Proven reliability

"O |V| 3 G A" wrote in message ...
hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper





JT September 24th 03 02:41 AM

Raid 1 is mirroring, RAID 0 is striping. In RAID 1, because the data is
mirrored if one drive goes bad, the other takes over. Of course if a virus
corrupts one drive, it corrupts the other as well.

In RAID 0, striping, the data is alternated between the two drives. If one
drive crashes, the data is lost even though the other drive is still good
and usable.

If you want raw speed, go RAID 0. If you want Data Integrity and
Reliability, RAID 1.

JT

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:12:04 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

another thing i didnt ask - with a RAID1 (striping) setup, if 1 drive goes
down (ie, faulty drive) does it take the other HDD with it for some reason?
or can i simply remove the faulty HDD, and revert back to a straight SATA
setup, with the 2nd good drive ?

tim
"JT" datacare@localhost wrote in message
ws.com...
On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 13:30:25 +0000 (UTC), "O |V| 3 G A"
wrote:

hi,

i`m in the market for a new HDD (my maxtor 40gb just aint big enough) and
i`m fancying making use of the 2x SATA ports on my a7n8x dlx mainboard.

i`m liking western digital's offering of their 10,000 rpm 8mb cache SATA
drive, but being only 36gb, it's just not big enough. is there any
manufacture making a 10k rpm drive around the 80-120gb area?

also, money permitting, i`m thinking about hitting the RAID striping

scene,
and if the drive is too expensive, then i`d add the 2nd drive at a later
date. if i was todo this, i`d be running straight SATA for a while untill

i
can afford the 2nd HDD for RAID. will i be able to add the 2nd drive and
setup a raid config without reinstalling winXP?

thanks
tim draper

WD just introduced their 73gb 10k rpm Raptors. If they are anything like
the 36gb ones, they will be very fast. Put one in a DB server which needed
the speed and it is outstanding in performance. (Having a gig of ram, dual
channel DDR helps as well). If you need speed, these are as fast as it

gets
without SCSI




JT September 24th 03 02:41 AM

Price is a good reason to go SATA. Drives are cheaper, and controllers are
MUCH cheaper.

SATA is not that radical a jump from ATA 100/133. Most of the electronics
is ATA with some added SCSI features, which the manufacturers have been
doing for years. The serial connection is not radically different from
other high speed serial connections. This is an evolutionary step, not
revolutionaryl, so should be fairly solid.

On Tue, 23 Sep 2003 22:52:28 GMT, "JAD" wrote:

SATA is pretty new and will develop with time.....why not SCSI? Proven reliability

"O |V| 3 G A" wrote in message ...




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:38 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HardwareBanter.com