RAID 0 worth it?

Similar Questions

• RAID - 1 with 10.11.3 No longer editing

  Hello

  I created a Raid 1 with two drives of 6 TB using the disk through the Terminal commands. Everything worked well.  I've just updated to 10.11.3 and now the reader rises at all.  I looked in the disk utility, and he could not see. I ran the diskutil list command in the terminal and she also could not see the disks.

  Any idea what would cause this?

  My system disk is also a Raid created with disk... utility and it works fine. It is built with two ssds on a PCIe Sonnet Raid 0 card.

  I have a Time Machine backup of the system drive. Should I restore to before the update to fix the problem? If all goes well, there must be a solution. I can't have to 6 worth of material disappearing every time that comes out an update.

  Thank you!

  Well, then the drive is showing now.

  I realized that a reboot was not enough to completely turn off readers and then turn again.

  When I tried to restart the other night, it still does not show upward. I tried to reboot in safe mode and it didn't work either. I turned my computer off... went to work... came home and it was fine.

  My graphics card has a reboot that requires a reboot. When it restarted the car was missing again. I stopped and started place... and the car was back.

  Weird... but solved.

• Brackets for Xserve/Xserve RAID

  Hello, is there a difference between Xserve/Xserve RAID drive apart from them being white/PATA/SATA caddies. That is to say all are the:

  1. I have blanks with different reference numbers interchangeable?
  2. II caddies PATA with reference numbers different interchangeable?
  3. III the SATA caddies with reference numbers interchangeable different?

  To give examples:

  1. A one Xserve G4 white held a Xserve G5/1.1/2.1, 3.1, or one Xserve RAID?
  2. A PATA caddy a G4 would fit all Xserve RAID?
  3. A one Xserve G5 SATA caddy would take an Xserve 1,1/2,1 / 3,1?

  Thank you

  1 - blanks with different reference numbers interchangeable?

  Not sure about this one but IIRC I used white an XServe RAID for a G4 XServe and you don't see any problems

  2 - PATA caddies with interchangeable different reference numbers?

  Yes, they should be. Yet once IIRC last time I tried this that I didn't see any problems. Part numbers for the 180 GB PATA/IDE ADM is 661-2829 for both models

  3 - SATA caddies with interchangeable different reference numbers?

  Not tried this, but saw that the two Assistant Deputy Ministers take the SATA drives and connections on the background of interconnection disc are the same (even if the references are different) it might be worth?

  To give examples:

  1 - a one Xserve G4 white held a Xserve G5/1.1/2.1, 3.1, or one Xserve RAID?

  The XServe G5 and XServe RAID YES NO

  2. a PATA Caddy a G4 would fit all Xserve RAID?

  YES, in my experience

  3 - a one Xserve G5 SATA caddy would take an Xserve 1,1/2,1 / 3,1?

  See the previous answer to no. 3. More information not directly related to your questions here:

  https://support.Apple.com/en-GB/HT1219

  I hope that this might help?

• UCS C200 RAID solution

  Hello

  I hope for your help about the technical question about the RAID.

  We bought a server in a rack of Cisco UCS C200. Now I looking for information on the best RAID solution in our case.

  The question:

  As I understand it, there is an integrated RAID solution: Intel ICH10R in UCS C200 server. We use this RAID configuration now and it works OK. However, we wonder if it is worth installing the PCIe controller (we have HP Smart Array P410 (ATA/dis2) card). We use currently 4 SATA and RAID drives works as expected, but we are interested in, if there are all the advantages of the separate RAID controller card. Above all, we are interested of performance benefits as we plan to have a lot of disk writes (records call - about 10-20 calls per hour, lasting 2 minutes on average). We would be happy to stay with RAID integrated if it works stable. On the other hand, we will install the above mentioned Intel RAID card if you say that it would be the best solution about the reliability and wear of the disc.

  I would be grateful for any comments.

  Kind regards

  Vytas

  Vytas,

  Your question is probably down to RAID levels supported for each card.  The performance of each should be relavitley the same, so I would not concentrate on that.

  The only supported RAID controllers are listed here and must be purchased from Cisco:

  http://www.Cisco.com/en/us/docs/unified_computing/UCS/c/HW/C200M1/install/RAID.html#wp1015625

  "Others' work, but you'd be yourself if you encountered problems with TAC.

  The integrated Intel ICH10R card supports up to four SATA using RAID0 (striped) or RAID1 (mirror) drives.

  If you need one RAID5, 10 or more, then you must a MegaRAID controller to do.

  All RAID controllers provided by Cisco are heavily on trial and could be your best option for reliability and performance.

  Kind regards

  Robert

• Adding a replacement disk in a RAID 5 (PERC S300) replacement hot

  I scoured through comments and think I have the solution almost, but would confirm or correct if possible.

  Have a PowerEdge R310, four 500 GB drives, RAID 5, with one of these defined as Global Hot Spare drives.  One of the spare wheel failed, hot (003) disks has done its job and kept during the RAID.

  Put in the replacement drive in and can see it is Ready on physical disks via manage open.  More I noticed that he as a Non Raid virtual drive virtual drives.

  I thought it was to automatically rebuild the RAID after the disc has been inserted, but it didn't.  I started to reconfigure it on existing RAID, hoping to choose the new disk and start the reconstruction, but he doesn't see the new drive as a physical drive.  I guess that's because the system has assigned the new drive as a new virtual disk.

  I remove the new virtual disk, and then run the reconfigure statement the existing virtual disk of RAID 5 to add the new drive?

  I hope this makes sense and I appreciate any help!  Right now my server is in place and very well, but these 500 GB drives are reliable - I lost an another late last year and replaced him.

  SBlades

  Thanks for the quick response.  If I already have a spare drive (the one who took over after the failure of the other disk), it will allow me to do the new hot spare?

  This player is no longer a "rescue." It is now a member of the array fully operational. You don't have a spare drive. It is also possible to have two hot-spare set.

  SBlades

  I run the Reconfiguration on the RAID 5 in Open Manager after the non - RAID VD is removed?

  No, Reconfigure will EXPAND a virtual disk, usually by adding a physical drive. So if you have a 3-drive RAID 5, you insert a new disk and run the statement reconfigures, you might reconfigure your 3-drive RAID 5 to 4 drive RAID 5 (is worth a drive to storage space by adding to your table/server) or a 4-drive RAID 6 (essentially a RAID 5 with a disc of relief, but instead of relief being a non-member member - only standyby player - help is integrated with the table as a full member. the RAID array results in an additional parity so that two disks can fail while maintaining the availability of the matrix, rather than wait for a player to fail before starting the reconstruction to become a member of the table; RAID 6 is usually best when using very large capacity disks).

• Best Configuration SSD / worth it?

  My current configuration / construction. http://pcpartpicker.com/p/LZKxP6

  I have 250 GB Samsung 850 Evo programs. I like WD Black 1 TB memory.

  I also have on hand two Scandisk SSD more with 500 MB read but only 128 write speed.

  I should even consider the use of these? One of the media to read / used in the project. One for the work disk cache.

  Will be 2 months before getting two other better SSDS. I have a few small projects at the end... use the dynamic link to After Effects (however I use Render and replace in Premiere Pro CC 2015 for some dynamic aspects of AE).

  Currently using WD Black 1 TB for the folder/media disc and zero project.

  I'd be better off the coast and have a slightly faster response if I cme onnecter them up here (two Sandisk SSD 120 GB)? Worth the effort?

  If you use raid-0 of the motherboard for the two sandisk ssd, it should speed up both write and read for them. the raid-0 would be 240 GB. having only high speed of reading better for storage media, as this would be only written once and read back when editing. If the media fits, you need only a new samsung 850 pro/prΘvisualisation cache. If your support does not fit on the raid configuration, the raid could be used for cache/previews. If you don't want RAID, you might split functions drive between all readers to help spread read & writes. as the examples here of directive generic to the installation disc drive

  your motherboard also, said that he supports the readers of m2. If your projects, media, previews and cache all use less than 512 GB of space, you might want to look at the samsung 950 pro and see if it is compatible with your motherboard. I don't know when the 1 TB version comes out. If you don't want to spend that much or needs space, sata ssd is as samsung 850's are always good options.

• If anyone has installed ESXi on an old post XW8400 and make use of the SAS RAID?

  So I dug up an old HP XW8400 Workstation, but it is missing some parts and I thought I'd see if anyone has this thing running with the SAS RAID, because most of the forums of discussion and problems seem to revolve around the SATA RAID. So is this still possible? I do not want to invest money and then have NOTHING to do...

  Well, you're lucky, because I had this question a long time ago, but I never thought that someone else would have taken the trouble but YES - it is supported - even if everybody out there seems to focus on the SATA RAID I took not stable worth, since I use SAS disks in my workstation , because they are MUCH faster and can support a flow MORE. I have ESXi 1483097 5.1 Build running with 2 450 GB SAS drives in a RAID 0 configuration, and the system just hums...

  It is an old machine, but I was surprised that he was able to follow with the latest versions of ESXi, that's why I don't bother throwing, so if someone is there looking into the purchase of a good workstation MARKET that supports ESXi 5.1 with dual Quad Core Xeon, 32 GB of RAM, and SAS RAID so you won't go wrong with this one. You will encounter a small problem though, but I guess I'll wait for others to try to run this configuration that I share this juicy tidbit, although it is relatively easy to overcome and all depends on how you run ESXi...

  I know if you tried and GB SAS...

• Use of an SSD RAID 0 on laptop

  I'm curious to know if would all benefit of performance... or barrier... If I took the party of the ability of my Asus laptop gaming to create a RAID 0 on two fast SSD occupying now the two bays for discs HARD internal, instead of the approach of conventional to use an SSD for the page file, programs and the OS and the other SSD for all the rest. Could a single volume that has more than 1 GB per second of data with ALL that SURPASS two separate SSDs when you use body?

  The only problem I see is that with your OS/apps on RAID 0 recovery if problem is extremely difficult, normal recovery tools do not work on RAID volumes.  This is the main reason why I don't him did not.

  I know she would give a better score PPBM but only on the partition disk i/o.  My cell similar to G750JW (two non-RAID SSD) to happen probably my time for export for the second score of SSD of ~ 75 seconds to something close to half of this ~ 38-40 seconds.  I seriously doubt that he would do anything to change the 3 other scores because they are designed to be intensive with (MPEG2-DVD without GPU) CPU or GPU (MPEG2-DVD with GPU) or a combination of the two (H.264).  I really don't think it's worth the problem or otherwise I certainly would do it.

• RAIDs of ESXi

  So I'm at a bit of a delema. I want a high availability system (err, around)...

  Currently we have a machine, I can get a second, but we cannot drop 2 k $ on vCenter to give living vmachine transfers when they die (true high availability).

  What I wanted to do was run a RAID, I'm uncertain on material RAIDs being as if material goes wrong, I need to go hunt down a similar card or the data on the disks are useless. Software RAID is great, but is available at the level of the VM, which means that if the OS drive dies, ESXi will start is no longer. And I can only handle the RAIDs started when equipment fires upward.

  I was going to set up our virtual servers with virtual RAIDS on 2 discs so they could get the extra security of the speed and the data, but is not this backup of almost just as good as the virtual machine every night (less lose a few hours of work), this in fact also a bet of 50% that it is either the OS of the 2nd drive disk in the RAID.

  Anyway, being as I'm new, what are my options to maintain a profitable facility for a small office with backup simple and fast restoration after a catastrophic failure time?

  Going to be an older Poweredge 1435SC with the installation of 120 GB (main) and the 1 TB drive (storage). I have the additional external backup storage.

  Not having not not 100% uptime is fine, but I'm wishing to reduce downtime and complexity as much as possible when the operating system drive fails and if RAIDing at the virtual machine level isn't worth the time. Should I keep just readers VM backups that are important? (we've got some that are volitle, and I have no 1.1 TB of backup storage, so I need to choose what to keep and what to chuck) and keep them all a single hard drive on the level of the BONE, and when things die I just reinstall ESXi and restore the virtual machines?

  Only VMWare has some backup software that I can connect to ESXi and basically their migration to a backup disk every night?

  Should I throw them to the tops of my arms and say "It will be fine!" and run with a hardware RAID? Am I too worried about hardware failure? Hardware RAIDs become more standard in how they are setup so that I can transfer to another machine easily?

  I would have to turn off the machine to swap anyway, readers being what they do not have hot swappable bays. > >

  Yes, you are being far too dramatic on the material.  Hardware RAID is your BEST high hand option.  Disk fails, using RAID 5 you can have 1 disk fails, and data are preserved, no interruption of service.  RAID 6, you can do it with 2 discs.  Fundamental difference is the performance, but I've not seen much of a difference, if any, performance.  so if you are paranoid to go with RAID 6.

  SE RAID won't save your VM, it will only mean that you can continue to operate in the event of hardware failure, your VM is still subject to corruption, the user misconfigration and deletion of data within the VM OS, this RAID is only part of the picture.

  If you are unable to remove $2K on VC, then you will not be able to buy backup either.  All backup solutions cost something and depending on how many you have, it could cost a lot.  Now you can use esXpress if you weren't on ESXi... esXpress does not work on ESXi, but it runs on the console version.

  So, I say make a case for VC and make someone responsible for purchase VC, you need.  You see already the advantage... then fight for it.  It's less $ 150.00 per month (if you do this for the 2010 budget)... but the return on investment is HUGE in less time.  So for you VC will save you problems hardware and the management of the virtual computer.  Of course that vmotion is assuming that you have the Central SAN solution.

• Question about Raid Autodetect ATA and Raid on

  I have Dell Dimension E520 Core 2 duo initially provided with 250 GB and Vista. I bought Windows 7 a few years ago but delayed after installation of Windows 7 for one reason or another.

  Last week my graphics card developed due to lack of memory, and for some reason Vista disk has become one start rained. I tried all sorts of things, but not luck. At one point, I changed Setup > DISKS > SATA Operation 'RAID ON' to ' RAID AUTODETECT ATA "and continued to install Windows 7 on another drive.

  So, the current configuration is as follows:

  Disk 0 is 1 TB (Western Digital and includes Windows 7
  Disc 1 is the original 250 GB with Vista old (fortunately I still have my intact docs on this subject)
  Setup > DISKS > SATA Operation is set to 'RAID AUTODETECT ATA. "

  My question is this:

  If I change this setting in the "RAID on" the computer reports the readers and non-RAID and prevents from starting. I want to know what setting should I use for SATA operation. Dell say "RAID on" even if the system has a drive... they claim it gives better performance.

  My BIOS is original (circa 2007)

  Thanks in advance

  I run raid with an mSata SSD hard drive and a mechanical hard drive. The performance is amazing. I tried my pc without raid performance and you can clearly see a difference.

  However, it makes no sense to run raid on a single hard drive. Just makes no sense.

  I don't think that Raid will really help with the performance of the two mechanical drives. There might be an improvement, but really is not worth it.

• Who and what motivates a RAID? Harm may be :)

  Hi, I've been waiting to get an evga sr-2, but they are so difficult to get their hands on at the moment where I was starting to wonder if I should go for something like that in the meantime. http://www.overclockers.co.UK/showproduct.php?ProdID=BU-031-ob

  I always wait longer and make big improvements instead, so am willing to wait another month if you need to get my hands on a sr-2, but sought to spec Harms silly pins first pro and noticed that it gets quite impressive for a single i7 results

  I was wondering if overclocked sr-2, clocked at 4.2Ghzplus is worth twice the money.

  In addition, any advice, I find myself with the first stage will use their raid on board to run a RAID 5 with 6 disks. (they do not raid 3)

  Finally I have plan to get an areca card but do not know what drives to use. WD Re4 (2 TB) seem to be pretty good for raid and critical use as £200, they are much more than blacks of WD. I was wondering what to do it is a lot of money, especially if I decide to get an areca card and use the raid 30 functions?

  Thank you, Michael.

  Michael,

  As you can see, leading Chris' in the Benchmark PPBM5 reflects the enormous power of double X 5680. Admitted, it's much more expensive than a single same overclocked i7-980 X, like Studio North. However there is a clear advantage a dual in the sense of Xeon system you'll have 12 DIMM slots and he can easily use the 2 GB sticks very affordable to get 24 GB, which can save a lot in comparison to 6 x on an X 58 mobo 4 GB sticks. Or else you can expand memory to 48 GB if you wish so.

  You may have seen this review already, but in case you missed it, look here: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/motherboards/2010/08/17/evga-classified-sr-2-review/1

  If you consider that there will be further improvements in multi-threading and some exporting modules in next CS, the more advantage of hearts and more memory is likely to increase with a 980 X.

  Regarding the drives, WD RE4 are an excellent choice. According to your storage needs and your timing to an Areca controller, it may be wise to start with the 1 TB version or 1.5 to and then later add another 6 x 6 x 1.5 or 1 TB. That will give you a Bay of 12 disks of the same gross capacity 6 x 2 TB for about the same amount, but because of the greater Bay will give better performance or in the case of 1.5 TB models even more storage capacity. I would advise against Caviar blacks because of the TLER problem.

  Plan for the Areca, you must keep in mind a way to transfer your data to a table of mobo in a table of Areca. You will first need to create a new 6-disc on the Areca, copy your data from the array to the new array of Areca mobo, then move one disk at a time from the mobo to the Areca and define everything first as a backup, and then expand the table. You must do this for all the existing disks, but this way you have no problem getting all your data to the new array intact. I would probably use a Raid3 or Raid5 with a hot spare, if you end up with 11 x Raid3/5 with a hot spare, or 12 x Raid6.

  I hope this helps.

• RAID hard drives, mark Question (evil?)

  I'm about to buy two disks for RAID0 for assets on my i7 rig, running Windows 7 (Yes, I'm aware of RAID0 is for execution only, I backup all the time). It would be great to get two 1 TB WD RE3 for a total of 2 TB (approximately $320 delivered), but I'm a cheapskate under budget constraint. This Samsung drive would provide sufficient space for the moment in a pair and is literally half the price: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822152118

  Two of them would be $170 shipped and be only a ½ TB more small once RAIDed the WDs. BUT, everyone has use these disks? I don't want to save money if it brings little reliability. Wrong, if you read this, I remember you say you use Samsungs?

  Yes, I use Samsungs F1 and as for you, it is a budget oriented choices. However, I have 16 of them.

  One thing to consider is that you intend to use them in Raid0, who has no redundancy. Reliability is so important to consider. Bill was awarded a contract of nice with 7200,12 records. It is a possibility, the other is the WD RE, that you mentioned, or the Samsung F3. Note, however, that I had 2 out of my failure of 16 disks in the first 4 months. At the same time replaced under warranty and after the reconstruction of the matrix, without loss of data. That, unfortunately is a luxury, you have with raid0. It's a tough call to say "get it". How critical is the data about the raid0, what facilities are to be restored in the event of a disk failure, what is it worth for you to $$$. My feeling is that the WD RE are the most reliable, the Samsung have the best price and 12 Seagates series is somewhere between the two.

• synchronization of the RAIDs at 2 different locations

  I recently started to work in 2 different places and must find a way to keep my 15 TB + of the continually changing and growing data (in RAID 0 training photoshop files) practice at both locations at any time.

  My best idea so far is to get a 15 TB portable working drive that I bring with me back and then continue to a RAID of TIME stationary MACHINE at each location who save permanently this portable work in car...

  If anyone has a better idea, please advise.

  Keep your valuable data on a striped RAID is dangerous. Sometimes interlaced RAID adds speed, but in case of disk failure, is likely to result in a total loss of all data without hope of a partial recovery.

  Put data of Time Machine on a mirrored RAID is a loss of readers.

  Time Machine can alternate automatically readers to keep two (or more) independent backup series. Just add the second drive and it automatically alternates.

  As always, you can use AppleRAID or an external RAID enclosure for the construction of a concatenated RAID set that resembles a drive for Mac OS X.

• RAID is no longer present in the storage "about this mac".

  After upgrading to Sierra my SoftRAID(4) drive does not appear in the about this mac storage section. I asked soft raid and their answer is that it's an apple problem

  If you haven't already done so, disconnect the SoftRAID(4) drive and stop your Mac. While the Mac is turned off, connect the player SoftRAID(4). Then restart your Mac. See if it appears in disk utility.

• It is worth buying an IBook G4?

  So I just need a laptop for the classification of documents and browsing the internet whenever I'm out, but not to download programs, I'm wondering if a G4 IBook could meet my needs.

  The iBook is a good machine, but in today's modern web, it is slow. Even with TenFourFox is can be slow. However if you're patient it can be done. PowerPC machines like the iBook G4 cannot run all modern browsers if most of the sites don't load properly. This was TenFourFox comes in. It is a fork of Mozilla Firefox and is always supported on the G4 and G3 even.

  Processor is fine on these machines. iWork 09 works pretty well and Microsoft Word 2004 works but is a bit slow on the PowerPC Mac for a reason any. Open Office is free and is quick (just look for an older version). Processor is easy on the material and does not require a high-end computer.

  Another thing to keep in mind is battery-operated. More original batteries do not hold a charge, so buying a replacement is probably necessary. Third-party batteries are cheap but are not always the best quality.

  It really depends on what you do on the web. PowerPC Macs are dead in the water when it comes to YouTube or video service. But with TenFourFox, General web searches should be good. In FFT, you can optimize the browzer do if it is faster. A simple Google search should give answers.

  I've owned several Macs PowerPC and all serve me well. But the question is it worth buying? I would say that try IT... These machines are cheap and they move things forward. Web browsing is slow, but written document is fine. Even if you don't like the performance of these machines can run tons of great software but also run Mac OS 9.

  Intel based Macbooks 2006-2008 models fell in price also. It's an option as well. These Macs run faster and manage modern browsers.

  Remember that if you buy and iBook, you need to do some research on this kind of software, it can work. Apple stopped supporting these PPC machines in 2007. Any software that is "Universal" on the box will run on Intel and PPC as iWork 09.

  If you have extra money go for the Intel MacBook, but the iBook will make what you need just more slow. Good luck