Hi, i just wanted to know if i'm going to buy two harddrives, than could i set one harddrive to raid 0 while the other to raid 1? also with raid 0+1, does this include 4 harddrives two for raid 0 and two for raid 1? And when last question does raid 0 or raid 1 wear or shorten a harddrives life span? thank you all.

Two drive RAID 0+1 is only possible with an Intel ICH7R.
Other than that you'll have to go with either RAID-0 or 1.

<b><font color=red>-></font color=red><font color=green>Thee obsoleter</font color=green><font color=red><-</font color=red></b>

when you say Intel ICH7R, you mean intel matrix technology?

Yeah. whoops

<b><font color=red>-></font color=red><font color=green>Thee obsoleter</font color=green><font color=red><-</font color=red></b>

So if i don't have intel matrix technology than i would have to use Silicon Image 3132 Controller, which requirs for a raid 0 two harddrives and the same for a raid 1? right? thank you.

Exactly. Or you could go with 4drives to get 1+0.

<b><font color=red>-></font color=red><font color=green>Thee obsoleter</font color=green><font color=red><-</font color=red></b>

Four drives is a bit expensive probably around 200 and more.

About raid 1, as i read in tomshardware that it's good for security, are we talking about virus and that kind of stuff, or a different kind of security issue. If raid 1 is for security what about data protection. is it more risky to put valuable data in raid 1, i know for sure it's risky for raid 0 but what about raid 1. I think to fix the data protection, i think raid 5 has to come into play. or if you just do a regular harddrive with no raid configurations.

I think if i'm going to be messing around i'll probably buy three harddrives with probably 120 gb or less, and put two on raid 0 and the other i don't know, i'm open to suggestions to what to do with the third drive.

If i'm going to go with four than i'll probably go with 80 drives, and that shouldn't be too expensive.

By the way, say i do configure my system to either raid 0+1 or 1+0, will harddrives in raid 0 or 1 have their different drive letter in windows or how are they seen by windows.
thank you.

if you are using raid1 then the other HDD is just a mirror of your principal hdd, so, if you have 2x 120 gigs, then both drive has the same data. RAID0 strip the data on each HDD, so if you have 2x120 gigs, then it addup a 240, so if one fail, then the whole array will fail as there is only chunk of data on the hdd.

RAID 1 is secure, because you dont care about doing a backup, it is done automatically. This, create a false safety environnement, as if something goes wrong with the PSU or with the controller and both drive fries or get corrupted, you're done anyway. RAID0 is just like having one hdd. When you get 1 hdd, you know that it may fail, or not. If you get 2, one may fail, or not. but anyway, you are making backup on media outside your computer, so even if your computer burn in flame, your valuable data is still safe. If you do backup your data and you are using raid1, then you are wasting valuable storage place.

Dont get me wrong, I know that for enterprise with server that contain valuable data, raid is useful and even necessary. but we are talking about PSU that cost as much as your whole computer here... and what about the RAID card?.

personnal and commercial are 2 different thing. So, whatever raid you choose, it is always best to have a backup of personnal data. With dvd burner and dvd media cheap as they are now, it is the best protection someone can have.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(" )ώ(" )

I think i understand what you just said. according to you, in raid 0 information is spread into two drives, make it fast, but on the other hand one fails the whole array fails.

On the other hand on Raid 1 the size of the two harddrive is not comulative, because it keeps on copying the data to the other harddrive or between eachother, creating a backup of data.

Thank you for your reply.

That's it. I use RAID0 since 2001 and no problem so far. I do keep backup, because of human error we all do sometime, but I never had an HDD to crash. It is true that I always put my array at the bottom of the case with a fan blowing fresh air on them.. Heat is the hdd killer. Sometime, having both hdd too close from each other (less than 1 inch) will cause them to overheat and start to act badly.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(" )ώ(" )

If a virus gets in both drives are infected. Afterall as Pat say the two drives in RAID-1 are identical copies of each other.

The point of RAID-1 is to decrease the chance of drive failure and that's ALL.

<b><font color=red>-></font color=red><font color=green>Thee obsoleter</font color=green><font color=red><-</font color=red></b>

On your computer you only using Raid 0, that it, no other raid. If this is the case, since you been using it since 2001 it seems like that Raid 0 is not too bad after all. You might just have saved me time and confusion of this is true. I was planning on buying two harddrives for raid 0 and another drive for all important information. but since you been using raid 0 and it seems okay, i think i might do the same. But of course i'm going to back up my important files and documents ect....

What do you guys think i should get, which harddrive:

1) Maxtor DiamondMax 10 6B200S0 200GB Serial ATA 7200RPM Hard Drive w/16MB Buffer. this for 92 dollars (thinking of getting this one)
2)Maxtor Maxline III 7L250S0 250GB Serial ATA 7200RPM Hard Drive w/16MB Buffer. this for 104 dollars

look at these in terms of performance and not of money or storage. if you guys have any other recommanditions than please do give me names of harddrives to look for but in the same price range of the harddrives above.

from what i read from the website of maxtor these drives are the same speed and everything, don't see much difference. same rpm, same cache, the only difference is that one has <9.0 seek time and the other 9.3 seek, also the disk size, that's about it.

thank you all.

It's a gamble with RAID-0. I've had my array built since 2002 and none of the drive has failed yet.
Tho I do know I'm putting my precious data dating back to 1999 on the edge of destruction.

<b><font color=red>-></font color=red><font color=green>Thee obsoleter</font color=green><font color=red><-</font color=red></b>

uum, Wusy how many harddrives do you have on your system, and what is your Raid configuration? if you don't mind that is. thank you.

The array that was built in 2002 was my two Maxtor 40GB.
The other RAID array(now RAID-5) are built early this year composed of old 10k SCSI drives.

<b><font color=red>-></font color=red><font color=green>Thee obsoleter</font color=green><font color=red><-</font color=red></b>

I only have one array, which now consist of 2 seagate 160 gigs sata HDD. I did upgrade my HDD a couple of time, for storage need, but my old HDD are still running so I guess that my 2001 array would have been ok as of today. I have 2 other HDD for storage only.

If you get the 2 maxtor and want to set up a RAID0 array, then the 250 gigs will be use as a 200 gigs. You'll loose 50 gigs in the process because the total capacity is = to the size of the smallest hdd x by the number of drive.

I would get 2 identicals drives, this will ensure smooth and safe operation. I like Seagate better because thay have a 5 years warranty that makes them easier to sell when I need more storage. I dont care at the specs because, in a day to day bsis, every drive will perform the same or perform better by a non significant margin.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(" )ώ(" )