hard-drives

[Ted Striker]

In terms of cost per GB, sure RAID5 is the more economical choice. But like Urban pointed out, there are alot of boards that come with onboard RAID cards now. In my experience, most of the boards come with built in RAID1/0 cards.

Hey Loinburger, that's pretty cool. Where did you see that message? BIOS? Was it a S.M.A.R.T message?

And really, how many home comuters need all of that much backed up, anyways?

Well, I just keep hearing stories about people who have lost alot of important data, I think a RAID card would have saved alot of them.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Edan
And really, how many home comuters need all of that much backed up, anyways?

Well heres one house I have over 5 GB of stuff that I have to always burn onto several CDs if I'm ever to format my computer.

[loinburger]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Hey Loinburger, that's pretty cool. Where did you see that message? BIOS? Was it a S.M.A.R.T message?

It was a BIOS message, IIRC, though it might have been the OS. The drive crapped out for good about six hours later, which gave me more than enough time to move all of my important (and not-so-important) stuff to the other hard drive.

On the first drive that crapped out, I noticed that I had 5% bad sectors after running scandisk one day. I then had 8% a week later, and 10% two days after that. I backed everything up in a big goddamn hurry at that point...

[Edan]

Originally posted by Tassadar5000


Well heres one house I have over 5 GB of stuff that I have to always burn onto several CDs if I'm ever to format my computer.

Well, of course there's always exceptions

[Edan]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
In terms of cost per GB, sure RAID5 is the more economical choice. But like Urban pointed out, there are alot of boards that come with onboard RAID cards now. In my experience, most of the boards come with built in RAID1/0 cards.

IIRC, a number of drives nowadays offer free raid cards, and the raid cards themselves can be had for like $20, though I take your point. I think my mb comes with Raid 5 built in as well, (cause I wanted that option available if I was going to have a raid) but I never bothered to build one.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
RAID is good. Many mobos come with IDE RAID these days.

mine has that (1.6 years old), but I haven't used it yet

Jon Miller

[Urban Ranger]

I don't think RAID-10 or RAID-50 is part of the spec. Anycow, I'd go with either RAID-1 or RAID-5 depending on the situation. RAID-1 for SOHO and RAID-5 for enterprises.

[Ted Striker]

Ya, you are right Urban, I was just showing off my RAID knowledge. RAID10 and 50 are for server class systems.

But RAID10 is actually better performance and fault tolerance wise over the RAID5. The penalty you pay though is the MB cost the Edan mentioned.

[Urban Ranger]

Interesting link: raid.edu - not a real website just part of it, and the link is for RAID-5.

[Urban Ranger]

I thought you want to be an Oracle DBA ted? How's that coming along?

[Ted Striker]

I should have some news for you on that in a couple of days Urban!! Thanks for asking, I'm pretty excited but I have to sit on the news so I don't jinx myself.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Six Thousand Year Old Man


At 10MB for a 2 minute video, that's 700 hours of porn, or a month nonstop. That IS a lot.

Logically 3 80 Mb drives at $100 each is 40 Mb more memory and $50 less than the 200 mb @ $350

You can't measure just by MB size. For IDE/EIDE/UDMA drives, they share the same bus and each pair shares an IRQ on typical dual channel motherboards, so moving data around three physical drives is slower than moving it around on one physical drive with multiple partitions.

Drive rotating speed, seek time and cache all influence cost, although I think ultra large UDMA drives are silly, since there is really only server apps where you need that much storage, and nobody in their right mind would use UDMA/IDE drives instead of SCSI.

For normal desktop performance issues, the more common drive sizes are more cost effective. If you're really looking at performance, (enterprise servers and especially database and data warehouse servers) UDMA / IDE isn't even in the picture. On my home/work desktop computers, I'm running Ultra160 SCSI 10k RPM drives, and running an Ultra320 SCSI RAID5 with 10k RPM drives on my servers.

For ultra high speed drives (15k RPM and 10k RPM, there are capacity limits because the drive heads need more slop space at those speeds, so the data density is lower on the same size platter. For 5400 and 7200 RPM drives, this isn't a problem, so you can do 250 gig or more (at least in SCSI) with no problem.

As far as how much useful data and hard to get stuff I have (as opposed to software I can reinstall from DVD or CD), on my home and office computers, I have about 25 gigs on each that need to be backed up. I use extra drives for that, and lock them up.

[Ted Striker]

On my home/work desktop computers, I'm running Ultra160 SCSI 10k RPM drives, and running an Ultra320 SCSI RAID5 with 10k RPM drives on my servers.

Damn Senor Rolls Royce!



How many drives you got on those RAID5 servers?

[Dinner]

I've got a 120 GB hard drive which means I can store a ton of MP3s off of Kazaa.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ted Striker


Damn Senor Rolls Royce!



How many drives you got on those RAID5 servers?

3 hotswappable 73 gigs on one (it'll go to six), and six hotswappable 73 gigs on the other. I would have liked to go to 15k RPM, but that would have forced me down to 36 gig, which isn't enough for the databases I'm running.