Sign in to follow this  
davidedney123

Tom's been at his crack pipe again

Recommended Posts

The man isn't saying that they don't support software RAID, he's saying that you can't boot of a software RAID array and he's perfectly correct when it comes to Win2k & XP Pro.  If you want to use software RAID under these OS's you need to boot off a single drive, hence the need for at least three drives.

Dave

Not so.

A software mirror is bootable. A software stripe is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Then he should have been just a little more specific.

Well then maybe you should have been a little more correct!

This also ignores the obvious application of RAID'ing 2 laptop drives within a laptop. Using win2k/XP a software stripe can easily be created that would give very good performance for a disk subsystem in the mobile market.
My point was you cannot do this without a third drive as your OS cannot exist on a software stripe with 2k/xp. Three drives on a laptop just isn't feasable.

Trinary

Your are correct. I did make a small mistake in my post using "mirror" instead of "stripe". Unfortunatly I can't seem to be able to edit my posts. Givin the context of the discussion I am sure most people new exactly what I was talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a company was building a laptop with a pair of drives in RAID, what's to stop them from including a little Promise RAID controller?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alexey V. Gubin

I'm not quite sure I understand what you are trying to say. Am I correct in assuming you are trying to use two drives each partitioned in two volumes? This would give you two smaller partitions in which one you could install the OS on, the other for whatever and the two larger partitions could be software striped. Problem with this is that you would be defeating your purpose, the increased STR would be more than offset by the constant seak times between the partitions. Remember in keeping in context of the discussion we are talking about laptops drives, and they already have slower seeks than there full size counterparts. It might have a very limited benefit in certain applications it would be interesting to see it tested this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"That would depend on how you describe "across the board" In all fairness if the maxtor drives have a 1ms faster access time over the WD, then it has won one of the competitions, thus making an across the board "sweep" as you claim by the WD impossible."

I define across the board as actual application benchmarks. Who cares if a HD tach reports the access time as half another drive if the drive performs horribly in real applications. I don't care if my video doesn't get the highest scores in 3DMark, my concern is performance within actual games I can play. Same concept.

"Most users will notice faster access times more so then they would a higher STR."

I would wager a considerable amount that no one would pick a Quantum KA+ drive as faster than a WD JB series drive in a blind test despite the Quantum's almost 2ms advantage. Access time has proven to be a pretty meaningless stat among IDE drives in similar generations, and pretty much completely useless when different generations are compared.

"My point was you cannot do this without a third drive as your OS cannot exist on a software stripe with 2k/xp. Three drives on a laptop just isn't feasable."

This isn't true. You do not need a third drive for win2k RAID 0. You have to convert both drives to dynamic volumes. From there you can partition the drives anyway you want, choosing any 2 equal size partitions to create the RAID 0 array. You cannot boot off this partition nor have your OS on it. Though I have honestly never seen the benefit of putting your OS on a RAID array. You can have your applications on the RAID array, as well as any large data files. With the standardization of onboard firewire in laptops and increased popularity of firewire camcorders, having a RAID array could help quite a bit for video editing on vacation or whatever, among other applications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alexey V. Gubin

I'm not quite sure I understand what you are trying to say. 

I'm trying to say that I don't see any way to fit 2.5inch RAID0 to notebook to get performance increase. All combinations I can imagine either require 3 disks or do not boost speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You cannot boot off this partition nor have your OS on it.

Wasn't that my hole point? Please don't lecture me on how to create a software Raid config with Win 2k/xp, I know quite well how to as I have an 8 drive FC-jbob with with multiple software stripes. You need to keep in context with the post that I was responding, and that was creating a software stripe with two hard drives from within a laptop to increase performance. I merly stated that this was not feasable IN A LAPTOP as it would require a 3 drive setup, or partitioning two drives in such a way ( and can you even get two drives in a laptop?) that would negate the performance increase alloted by such a stripe.

I would wager a considerable amount that no one would pick a Quantum KA+ drive as faster than a WD JB series drive in a blind test despite the Quantum's almost 2ms advantage. Access time has proven to be a pretty meaningless stat among IDE drives in similar generations, and pretty much completely useless when different generations are compared.

By this defintion one should see no performance increase between 5400 rpm and 7200 rpm drives. And I disagree with you about access times vs STR, however it is point we could argue until we are both blue in the face.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this