I recently ordered a new computer with 2 250 gb hard drives, I plan on runnign them in raid 0 but I wanted to know something. I want to make at least 2 partitions, 1 for the os only and another or more for everything else. The question is, will there be any problems in doing this or any impact in the performance of raid 0? Thanks in advanced!
Originally Posted by Pirate_RRRRRR_IIIIII
why even bother with raid 0?
you lose 1 drive, you lose all of your data
that's crap
Performance should be the same however you partition it.
Do you realize that when one of your drives dies you'll lose all your data?
:fire
"CompuGeek your geekiness is unsurpassed except by your virginity." - Trilobyte
Since it hasn't been mentioned yet, if you lose one drive...you're going to lose all your data. Is that a risk you're willing to take?
Google | cpugeniusmv
"I have no special talents, I am only passionately curious."
Albert Einstein
Ask smart questions!
Why yes, yes it IS a risk I'm willing to take, I backup data on a regular basis, If I lose one drive I'll just get another one and reinstall everything. Thanks for the replies!
p.s. besides, hard drives last a pretty long time, the 60 gig I have in my 4 year old pc is still in perfect working order, so the huge "risk" I am taking isnt that huge. and like I said, backup often!
why reload 2 drives when 1 fails when you can reload just 1?
it is just a waste of effort for an extremely marginal (if any) performance boost
Ibid.
:hole
"CompuGeek your geekiness is unsurpassed except by your virginity." - Trilobyte
What about a 500GB HDD?
The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; the Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; the Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; the Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
I wish I had a 500GB hard drive
I wouldnt bother with it
I run 2 scsi 10,000 rpm in raid 0, youd be better to use your drive for linear space, or use a different raid
to answer your question, two parts shouldnt be a problem, but theres no performance benefit either.
its even funnier when you lose all your data
.
Plus, I don't think the Windows OS can be installed on a Raid 0(If I'm wrong let me know). Therefore the only speed increase would be if you placed your swap file on the RAID drive or you happen run some rare program that requires massive amounts data from your hard drive all at once.
Maybe this can help
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.c...eid=830&page=5
read the whole article, then check out the recomended readings at the bottem
.
Cool, Thanks
I have a 300GB one and a 1TB one. :)
The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; the Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; the Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; the Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
There are solutions to situations such as this. The best thing is to copy important data to blank CD or DVD. One way to organise your HD in terms of files are folders that fit a DVD disc etc.
The Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; the Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; the Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; the Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and the Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it is.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks