Recent content by Paendrag

If one drive fails you lose all your data, but the other drive will still be working fine, you'd just have to reformat/partition it. You can do whatever you want to the drives when they're not running. Removing the cable then reinserting it won't do anything to the RAID array. Edit: Time...

It's been stated several times in this thread, so I don't know how you've missed it, but PCI-E and PCI are not compatible, so your card will not work in a PCI slot. Also a PCI-E x8 card does not physically fit into a PCI-E x1 slot, you'd have to file away part of the PCI-E x1 slot and hope it...

Yeah it's the 1.2 GHz dual core, I'm assuming it's an Intel IOP348 but it's never stated explicitly that I've seen. I went from 4x750 GB to 5x750 GB, which is what I've got now. The expansion process took 47-48 hours.

Would that be if one of the original drives failed? While I was trying to expand my 4 disk RAID 5 to a 6 disk RAID 6 my computer crashed, but the RAID 5 array was still working, but marked as degraded. I removed the two new drives and all the data seems to have survived intact. Right now I'm...

From Anandtech: "If it is not obvious by now, RAID 0 will provide outstanding results in synthetic benchmarks but really does nothing in actual applications. We should probably clarify that statement in detail. Utilizing the best performing drives in RAID 0 is the setup to have if you are...

There are two options, lets list their advantages over eachother: Option 1 (single drive): Less noise Less heat Less space used Better reliability Less complexity Can be moved between all kinds of PCs and operating systems Option 2 (RAID 0): Slight performance increase I think...

RAID 0 isn't the solution to long boot times, rebooting less often is :). If you want quick power-on times STR (Suspend To RAM) is the way to go IMO.

Two strong points for the single 1 TB drive: 1. You have about half the chance of losing all your data compared to the RAID 0. 2. You won't have to worry about weather or not you can transfer your RAID 0 array to a new motherboard, or temporarily transferring it to a different PC etc...

Yeah the numbers seem a bit high. Does your RAID controller use write-back cache huntrik? My single Seagate 7200.10 750 GB drive gets 145.4 MB/s using the same settings as you when I have write-back cache enabled, but only 91.8 MB/s with the cache disabled. This is on an Adaptec 5805 with 512...

The more expensive drive is a RAID edition drive, RE2 = RAID Edition 2. It has TLER officially supported (though it can be enabled shadily on the other drive as well), and I believe it has some other reliability/performance feature relevant to RAID/many-disk-systems which had something to do...

Does Windows Vista even support software RAID 5? I've tried to search for information on how to do it but I haven't found anything.

I don't mean to pester you on your choice not to go with RAID, but might I ask why you are choosing to use 5 mirror/backup drives instead of using RAID5 or 6? I'm just wondering if I am overlooking some advantage that setup might have over RAID.

Seagate calls it Error Recovery Control (ERC), and AFAIK they don't have it on any of their consumer drives, only the RAID/enterprise edition drives. Why should TLER/ERC be more important on WD drives than on Seagate drives? If it wasn't relevant to Seagate then Seagate wouldn't bother touting...

Why should he stay away from WD GP drives? You can enable TLER on them (which you can't do with any Seagate drives that I've heard of), making them a sort of poor man's RAID edition drives, and they are low noise/power. They are 5400 RPM, but will certainly have no problems at all with read...

Just moved my OS drive to the 5805 and all's working fine so far, though it did require a reactivation of Windows Vista. I have tried filling the cache by transferring large files from several different drives onto my RAID5 (to see if I'll experience the problem you mentioned). The transfer...