Search Results

Search found 21196 results on 848 pages for 'software raid'.

Page 1/848 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Practical RAID Performance?

    - by wag2639
    I've always thought the following to be a general rule of thumb for RAID: RAID 0: Best performance for READ and WRITE from stripping, greatest risk RAID 1: Redundant, decent for READ (I believe it can read from different parts of a file from different hard drives), not the best for WRITE RAID 0+1 (01): combines redundancy of RAID 1 with performance of RAID 0 RAID 1+0 (10): slightly better version of RAID 0+1 RAID 5: good READ performance, bad WRITE performance, redundant IS THIS ASSUMPTION CORRECT? (and how do they compare to a JBOD setup for R/W IO performance) Are certain practical RAID setups better for different applications: gaming, video editing, database (Acccess or SQL)? I was thinking about hard disk drives but does this apply to solid state drives as well?

    Read the article

  • Onboard RAID vs Software RAID

    - by mvid
    My motherboard, an Asus M4a79t Deluxe, advertises RAID 0/1/5 capabilities. My limited understanding is that onboard RAID is better than software RAID. Is this necessarily true? Is an onboard RAID controller closer in performance to a software controller or a dedicated hardware controller?

    Read the article

  • Apple RAID configuration vs Hardware RAID

    - by James Hill
    I am researching external HDD's capable or RAID 1 to store a large amount of video content during overseas filming. After filming, the content will be brought back to the office and offloaded onto our storage server. After doing some research, I've found that I can buy an external drive with a built in RAID controller, or I can buy an external drive, with 2 HDD's, that I can configure in a RAID 1 array using the OS. RAID 1 is what we're looking for. I've done some reading on software RAID vs. hardware RAID, but the resources I've found don't discuss performance as it relates to video content or what happens to a software RAID when the computer dies. Question 1: Will the hardware RAID be more performant when dealing with large video files? Question 2: If the mac dies, does my RAID die with it (will my data be accessible on another mac)?

    Read the article

  • Apartment management software. Apartment accounting software FREE.

    - by Jay Kinker
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/JayKinker/archive/2014/08/13/apartment-management-software.-apartment-accounting-software-free.aspx How are you managing your society today? How about bill generation & collection or socializing at your housing society?   Check out the all new online and offline services to manage your society. Online management and accounting software for housing society is free now. Get your housing society or neighbourhood online today for FREE.   Get a new amenity at your society today!   Societyhive services: www.societyhive.com Societyhive helpdesk: www.societyhive.com/helpdesk   Helpdesk is a free service to provide legal and management advice for societies. Do let me know if you have any feature request you’d want to see at Societyhive.

    Read the article

  • How to move a windows machine properly from RAID 1 to raid 10?

    - by goober
    Goal I would like to add two more hard drives to my current RAID 1 setup and create a RAID 0 setup on top of the two RAID 1 setups (which I believe is referred to as "RAID 10"). Components Involved Intel P68 Chipset Motherboard 4 SATA ports that can be configured for Raid An intel SSD cache that sits in front of the RAID, and a 64 GB SSD configured in that manner Two 1TB HDDs configured in RAID 1 OS: Windows 7 Professional Resources Consulted so far I found a great resource on LinuxQuestions.org for a good "best practices" process for Linux machines, but I'd like to develop a similar process that I know works on Windows Machines.

    Read the article

  • RAID Volume is no longer showing in Raid Controller BIOS and in Windows

    - by Gordon
    Hi all, I have installed some critical Windows Updates yesterday and now my external RAID Volume no longer shows in Windows Vista x64. All updates went through successfully. For their description, I cannot see how they should relate to the issue, but this is the only change that happened, so who knows. Anyway, here is the details: I have an external eSata enclosure that is running on a SiI4726 controller. I can connect to the controller with it's management utility from the computer the enclosure is connected to. The three drives in the enclosure show up as JBODs. I had those drives configured to be one logical RAID5 drive. RAID management is done through a SiI3132 SoftRaid controller. The Raid Management Utility just shows empty channels where it usually shows the Raid Group. In the Windows Disk Manager, I can see an unknown unitialized device. This is fine according to the setup manual. What it doesn't show is my Raid drive. It's gone. Also, when booting Windows, the BIOS of the controller used to show the RAID volume before booting the OS. This is not happening anymore. Updating drivers and firmware did not help. I have made sure the drivers and firmware are compatible to each others. And like I said, it used to work before. Any clues?

    Read the article

  • Add a small RAID card? Will it help overall stability and performance of my nine hard drives?

    - by Ray
    Hi, Will I get any extra genuine added performance and RAID stability if I insert a basic RAID card into a PCI-E x1 slot? I am considering the Adaptec 1220SA - 2 port SATA , pci-express (1x) , raid 0/1. Ok it only supports two SATA drives. Purpose is to help support the eight internal hard drives (1TB each), a DVD drive and an external e-SATA connected 2TB hard drive - by dealing with two of the internal hard drives. My current configuration of eight internal 1TB Barracuda (7200.12) SATA hard drives, one external 2TB SATA Western Digital Green Drive (e-SATA) and one DVD drive can already be supported by the Intel P55 & JMicron controllers on the ASUS motherboard : the Intel P55 (controls six HDD; configured as three x RAID 1), and the JMicron (controls two HDD as one RAID 1, as well as the DVD drive and the external SATA drive via the motherboard's e-SATA port (controlled by the JMicron)). Bigger picture details : I have an ASUS motherboard designed for the LGA1156 type processor and it includes the Intel P55 Express Chipset and JMicron. I am using the Intel Core i7-870 processor, and have 8GB DDR3 (1333) memory (four x 2GB Corsair DIMMs). Enough overall power. The power supply is more than sufficicient for the system. Corsair AX850. The system will never need the full 850 watts (future : second graphics card). The RAID card would provide hardware RAID 1 for two of the eight intrnal drives. It would either reduce the load on : the Intel P55 firmware RAID support, or replace the JMicron controller's RAID 1 set. I am busy installing the above configuration using Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit as the OS. The RAID card is a last minute addition to the plan. Is it worth spending the extra R700 - R900 on the Adaptec 1220SA, or equivalent RAID card? I cannot afford to spend yet another R2000 - R3000 on a RAID card that would support many SATA2 hard drives, with a better RAID, example the RAID 5. My Issue & assumption : I am trusting that the Intel P55 chipset can properly handle six drives, configured as three * RAID 1. I am assuming that the JMicron can handle, using its RED SATA ports, one RAID-1 (two HDDs). The DVD drive connects to the JMicron optical SATA port 1 (white port 1). White port 2 is not used. The e-SATA connection is from the JMicron straight to, and through the motherboard - to an on-board (rear panel) e-SATA port. Am I being a little hopeful in only using the on-board Intel P55 and the JMicron? Is it a waste of money to install a RAID card that handles two SATA2 drives? OR Is it wisdom to take the pressure a little off the Intel P55? Obviously I am interested in data security, hence RAID 1, not RAID Zero. RAID 5 would be nice. The CPU, Intel Core i7-870 will provide the clout. Context to nine drives : I am using virtualisation with Windows 7 Ultimate. Bootable VMs. The operating system gets a mirror. Loaded apps gets a mirror. The current design data is kept in another mirror and Another mirror is back-up one and / or VM territory. Then the external 2TB drive (via e-SATA) is the next layer of data security and then finally, I use off-site data security. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Possible to migrate from non-RAID to RAID 1 and then RAID 5?

    - by stueng
    Using software RAID only Is it possible to start with a 2TB disk full of data and safely add it to a RAID 1 array? Is it then possible to add a third disk and migrate the RAID 1 array into a RAID 5 array? OR Is it possible to start with a 2 disk degraded RAID 5 array and then add the third disk later to create a health RAID 5 array? Backstory: I wish to migrate from a 2 disk NAS (RAID 1) to a 3 disk NAS and only purchase one new disk in doing so

    Read the article

  • Do I have to worry about "error: superfluous RAID member"?

    - by 0xC0000022L
    When running update-grub on the newly installed Ubuntu 12.04 with an older software RAID (md), I get: error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Generating grub.cfg ... error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-24-generic Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-24-generic error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found linux image: /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-23-generic Found initrd image: /boot/initrd.img-3.2.0-23-generic error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found memtest86+ image: /boot/memtest86+.bin error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). error: superfluous RAID member (5 found). Found Debian GNU/Linux (5.0.9) on /dev/sdb1 Found Debian GNU/Linux (5.0.9) on /dev/sdc1 done I would be less worried if the message would say warning: ..., but since it says error: ... I'm wondering what the problem is. # cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md2 : active raid1 sdc1[1] sdb1[0] 48829440 blocks [2/2] [UU] md3 : active raid1 sdc2[1] sdb2[0] 263739008 blocks [2/2] [UU] md1 : active raid5 sdg1[3] sdf1[2] sde1[1] sdh1[0] sdi1[4] sdd1[5](S) 1250274304 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/5] [UUUUU] unused devices: <none> Do I have to worry or is this harmless? btw: disregard the mentioning of Debian 5.0.9, that was the previously installed system and is going to be overwritten. It's on /dev/md2 actually.

    Read the article

  • Should I use "Raid 5 + spare" or "Raid 6"?

    - by Trevor Boyd Smith
    What is "Raid 5 + Spare" (excerpt from User Manual, Sect 4.17.2, P.54): RAID5+Spare: RAID 5+Spare is a RAID 5 array in which one disk is used as spare to rebuild the system as soon as a disk fails (Fig. 79). At least four disks are required. If one physical disk fails, the data remains available because it is read from the parity blocks. Data from a failed disk is rebuilt onto the hot spare disk. When a failed disk is replaced, the replacement becomes the new hot spare. No data is lost in the case of a single disk failure, but if a second disk fails before the system can rebuild data to the hot spare, all data in the array will be lost. What is "Raid 6" (excerpt from User Manual, Sect 4.17.2, P.54): RAID6: In RAID 6, data is striped across all disks (minimum of four) and a two parity blocks for each data block (p and q in Fig. 80) is written on the same stripe. If one physical disk fails, the data from the failed disk can be rebuilt onto a replacement disk. This Raid mode can support up to two disk failures with no data loss. RAID 6 provides for faster rebuilding of data from a failed disk. Both "Raid 5 + spare" and "Raid 6" are SO similar ... I can't tell the difference. When would "Raid 5 + Spare" be optimal? And when would "Raid 6" be optimal"? The manual dumbs down the different raid with 5 star ratings. "Raid 5 + Spare" only gets 4 stars but "Raid 6" gets 5 stars. If I were to blindly trust the manual I would conclude that "Raid 6" is always better. Is "Raid 6" always better?

    Read the article

  • RAID-1 and regular drive removal (using RAID-1 as a backup measure)

    - by Vi
    Is using mdadm's RAID-1 of 2 partitions (one on laptop's internal HDD, one on external HDD) a good idea. I want the system to work as RAID-1 if both drives are present, work as regular volume (degradad RAID-1) if external HDD is unplugged and quickly resync when I plug external HDD again. Questions: Is it a good idea? Will write-intent bitmap be enough for this task or I need something else? Should I consider doing it at filesystem level (3b. if yes, how?). Basic requirements are: Quick resync when I re-add the external drive (provided I hasn't changed that partition). More or less consistent data on the removed drive if I remove it not during write/resync operation. If I remove the drive during resync I expect the data to be somewhat inconsistent, but expect quick resync completion when I re-add it again. E.g. I want the the remaining drive to track what is changed (there can be a lot of changes) and that sync back only those parts that need it.

    Read the article

  • Does software architect/designer require more skills and intellectual than software engineer (implementation)?

    - by Amumu
    So I heard the positions for designing software and writing spec for developers to implement are higher and getting paid more. I think many companies are using the Software Engineering title to depict the person to implement software, which means using tools and technologies to write the actual code. I know that in order to be a software architecture, one needs to be good at implementation in order to have an architectural overview of a system using a set of specific technologies. This is different than I thought of a Software Engineer. My thinking is similar to the standard of IEEE: A software engineer is an engineer who is capable of going from requirement analysis until the software is deployed, based on the SWEBOK (IEEE). Just look at the table of content. The IEEE even has the certificate for Software Engineering, since ABET (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology) seems to not have an official qualification test for Software Engineer (although IEEE is a member of ABET). The two certificates are CSDA and CSDP. I intend to take on these two examination in the future to be qualified as a software engineer, although I am already working as one (Junior position). On a side note on the issues of Software Engineer, you can read the dicussion here: Just a Programmer and Just a Software Engineer. The information of ABET does not accredit Software Engineer is in "Just a Software Engineer". On the other hand, why is Programmer/Softwar Engineer who writes code considered a low level position? Suppose if two people have equal skills after the same years of experience, one becomes a software architect and one keeps focus on implementation aspect of Software Engineering (of course he also has design skill to compose a system, since he's a software engineer as well, but maybe less than the specialized software architect), how comes work from Software Engineer is less complicated than the Software Architect? In order to write great code with turn design into reality, it requires far greater skill than just understanding a particular language and a framework. I don't think the ones who wrote and contributing Linux OS are lower level job and easier than conceptual design and writing spec. Can someone enlighten me?

    Read the article

  • Hardware Raid Card Reviews with SSDs

    - by Nalandial
    Yes I realize there are several questions about this but none of them seem to have the answer I'm looking for. I have two SSDs and am looking to buy a purely hardware raid card for them; however, I can't seem to find any reviews that have specifically tested hardware raid cards with SSDs rather than testing the SSDs themselves. I'm looking for a review because I'm assuming that for example: 100% gain with two 7200rpm drives doesn't necessarily mean 100% gain with a pair of SSDs, since there would be higher speeds, meaning more throughput, meaning more processor/memory usage for the card. If this assumption is wrong then that's fantastic; however if it's true, I am quite sad and would really appreciate any advice or reviews you can find. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Software RAID 10 on Linux

    - by vpetersson
    For a long time, I've been thinking about switching to RAID 10 on a few servers. Now that Ubuntu 10.04 LTS is live, it's time for an upgrade. The servers I'm using are HP Proliant ML115 (very good value). It has four internal 3.5" slots. I'm currently using one drive for the system and a RAID5 array (software) for the remaining three disks. The problem is that this creates a single-point-of-failure on the boot drive. Hence I'd like to switch to a RAID10 array, as it would give me both better I/O performance and more reliability. The problem is only that good controller cards that supports RAID10 (such as 3Ware) cost almost as much as the server itself. Moreover software-RAID10 does not seem to work very well with Grub. What is your advice? Should I just keep running RAID5? Have anyone been able to successfully install a software RAID10 without boot issues?

    Read the article

  • Best way to grow Linux software RAID 1 to RAID 10

    - by Hans Malherbe
    mdadm does not seem to support growing an array from level 1 to level 10. I have two disks in RAID 1. I want to add two new disks and convert the array to a four disk RAID 10 array. My current strategy: Make good backup. Create a degraded 4 disk RAID 10 array with two missing disks. rsync the RAID 1 array with the RAID 10 array. fail and remove one disk from the RAID 1 array. Add the available disk to the RAID 10 array and wait for resynch to complete. Destroy the RAID 1 array and add the last disk to the RAID 10 array. The problem is the lack of redundancy at step 5. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Best way to grow Linux software RAID 1 to RAID 10

    - by Hans Malherbe
    mdadm does not seem to support growing an array from level 1 to level 10. I have two disks in RAID 1. I want to add two new disks and convert the array to a four disk RAID 10 array. My current strategy: Make good backup. Create a degraded 4 disk RAID 10 array with two missing disks. rsync the RAID 1 array with the RAID 10 array. fail and remove one disk from the RAID 1 array. Add the available disk to the RAID 10 array and wait for resynch to complete. Destroy the RAID 1 array and add the last disk to the RAID 10 array. The problem is the lack of redundancy at step 5. Is there a better way?

    Read the article

  • Software RAID to hardware RAID, can it be done?

    - by gtaylor85
    Can it be done ... well. (For the record, I did not set this server up.) In my server there are 4 disks. 3 of them are in a software RAID5, and 1 has the OS installed. I want to buy a RAID controller, 4 new HDs and set up a hardware RAID5. If possible, I'd like to just image the current setup, and use it to build my new one. My questions are: Can I image a 3 disk RAID5 to 4 disk RAID5? Are there problems with this? What is considered best practice for your OS. To have it on a separate disk like it currently is, or to install it on the RAID5? Thank you. I can clarify anything. I'm not sure what other info might be pertinent.

    Read the article

  • moving raid 10 to another identical server both on Smart Array 6i controllers

    - by SalimQrdl
    I have dead HP DL 380G4 with RAID 1+0 with 1 logical volume from 4x72GB drives on built-in Smart Array 6i 128Mb BBWC. It was shut down properly. It seems it was usual death for Proliant with ILO led 2,3,8 lighting. I want to move array to another identical server with same raid firmware level. What is the best strategy?: I have RAID 1+0 on bay 0 bay 1 bay 2 bay 3 As I understand bay0+bay1 are in RAID 1 , bay2+bay3 are in RAID 1, and both RAID 1 pairs are in RAID 0. So should I : Clear RAID config on new server, insert bay 0, bay 2 and power-on or Create RAID 1+0 with 1 logical volume from clear HDDs , and then poweroff ,remove HDDs and insert 2 HDDs(bay 0, bay 2) from old RAID 1+0. then power-on. (each hdd has its raid position info stored but may be could work on same config) According to documentation for Smart Array 6i it could be possible to migrate. however one requirement point is unclear for me Before you move drives, the following conditions must be met: • The array is in its original configuration. " What is orginal and non-original config for RAID 1+0? Another point "If you want to move an array to another controller, you must also consider the following additional limitations: • All drives in the array must be moved at the same time." I want to move one hdd from each RAID 1 pair. to have mirrors untouched just in case. Do they mean to move all 4 simultaniously? Smart Array 6i User Guide: Moving Drives and Arrays You can move drives to other ID positionson the same array controller. You can also move a complete arrayfrom one controller to another, even if the controllers are on different servers. Before you move drives, the following conditions must be met: • If moving thedrives to a different server, the new server must have enough empty bays to accommodate all the drives simultaneously. • The move will not result in more than 14 physical drives per controller channel. • No controller will be configured with more than 32 logical volumes. • The array has no failed or missing drives. • The array is in its original configuration. • The controller is not reading from or writing to any of the spare drives in the array. • The controller is not running capacity expansion, capacity extension, or RAID or stripe size migration. • The controller is using the latestfirmware version (recommended). If you want to move an array to another controller, you must also consider the following additional limitations: • All drives in the array must be moved at the same time. • In most cases, a moved array (and the logical drives that it contains) can still undergo arraycapacity expansion, logical drive capacity extension, or migration of RAID level orstripe size. When all the conditions have been met: Back up all data before removing any drives or changing configuration. This step is requiredif you are moving data-containing drives from a controller that does not have a battery-backed cache. Power down the system. If you are moving an array from a controller that contains a RAID ADG logical volume to a controller that does not support RAID ADG: Move the drives. Power up the system. If a 1724 POST message is displayed, drive positions were changed successfully and the configuration was updated. If a 1785 (NotConfigured)POST message is displayed: a. Power down the system immediately to prevent data loss. b. Return the drives to their original locations. c. Restore the data from backup, if necessary. Check the new drive configuration byrunning ORCA or ACU ("Configuring an Array" on page 9).

    Read the article

  • The road from software support to software development

    - by brokenisfixed
    I am at a crossroad - I've been working for whole 4 years as a support person fixing countless bugs, developing (minimal) changes and improvements to our software, working together with our clients and users. I started as a complete noob, without a good understanding of .NET, C#, SQL Server, etc. I had to work late nights and weekends just to catch up to my co-workers and to prove to myself that I am capable to do the work and do it good. I don't consider myself an expert in those fields, but I feel pretty comfortable working with them ;) I think I have had enough of it and I want changes - I want to move away from support and start working as a developer ;) If there is anyone who has gone this road before? Could you, please, share an advice or two?

    Read the article

  • Business guy building a software company [closed]

    - by Dreamer
    I am a business guy who is about to embark on a very risky journey to start this own software company. I have done sales for several software companies and in the last 8 years, I have managed to generate over $15 million in pure SAAS revenues for my employers. I think now its time to do it for myself and see where I can take the business. I have an idea in mind which I would like to develop and have been speaking with several companies who I may hire to convert that idea into a SAAS based offering. I am scared of the following: Being ripped off as I have no technical knowledge Over-charged Building something and realizing the foundation was weak, not scalable etc. Can anyone help me identify what I need to do before I sign a software development company to start my project. What do I need to know? What is the typical cost? What is a realistic time frame? Which coding language is better? What steps can I take to prevent myself from being ripped-off?

    Read the article

  • My software is hosted on a "bad" website. Can I do anything about it?

    - by Abluescarab
    The software I've created is hosted on what you could call a "bad" website. It's hard to explain, so I'll just provide an example. I've made a free password generator. This, along with most of my other FREE software, is available on this website. This is their description of my software: Platform: 7/7 x64/Windows 2K/XP/2003/Vista Size: 61.6 Mb License: Trial File Type: .7z Last Updated: June 4th, 2011, 15:38 UTC Avarage Download Speed: 6226 Kb/s Last Week Downloads: 476 Toatal Downloads: 24908 Not only is the size completely skewed, it is not trial software, it's free software. The thing is that it's not the description I'm worried about--it's the download links. The website is a scam website. They apparently link to "cracks" and "keygens", but not only is that in itself illegal, they actually link to fake download websites that give you viruses and charge your credit card. Just to list things that are wrong with this website: they claim all software is paid software then offer downloads for keygens and cracks; they fake all details about the program and any program reviews and ratings; they and the downloads site they link to are probably run by the same person, so they make money off of these lies. I'm only a teenager with no means to pursue legal action. This means that, unfortunately, I can't do anything that will actually get results. I'd like my software to only be downloaded off my personal website. I have links to four legitimate locations to download my software and that's it. Essentially, is there anything I can do about this? As I said above, I can't pursue legal action, but is there some way I can discourage traffic to that website by blacklisting it or something? Can I make a claim on MY website to only download my software from the links I provide? Or should I just pay no mind? Because, honestly, it's a bit of a ways back in Google results. Thank you ahead of time.

    Read the article

  • Secure an Application/Software by expiration with Date?

    - by JNL
    I have been working on some software application and I update them every 6 months. Currently, the way I track the date is by extracting the date from the system when the user installes the application, encrypt it and store it in a file locally. Whenever the application is started, it checks if 6 months have passed, then it works or it doesn't, in which case it shows an error message telling the user to update. I wonder whether there is a better way to do this. Any comments or suggestions would be highly appreciated

    Read the article

  • hardware raid0 to software raid0

    - by Frankie
    Does anyone know if it's possible to switch from a hardware based RAID0 to a software one? Have a broken raid controller (vintage, wont find it anywhere) but I know the Array is in good conditions. Has anyone tried this, and/or know if its possible? Thank you for your time.

    Read the article

  • BIOS setting: AHCI or RAID (when using SSD + 2x HDD in RAID-0)

    - by nixdagibts
    Hello there, I want to add a new SSD and use it as system drive with Win7 x64 installed. As driver I chose newest Intel Rapid Storage driver (not MSAHCI). I know that I have to use AHCI as BIOS setting for optimal SSD read/write performance. But I'm also using 2 normal HDDs as separate RAID-0 SSD: Win7 HDD: RAID-0 HDD: RAID-0 If I set my BIOS on my ASUS P5W DH Deluxe to AHCI, my RAID-0 cant be recognized And If im using RAID as setting, maybe my SSD has not its top speed. But I'm not sure about that. In short: AHCI no RAID-0 RAID no optimal SSD performance (?) Now my question: Can I use RAID as BIOS setting and be sure, that theres no decrease in SSD performance? Google finds so many articles with similar topics and my head is just exploding. Two examples: - set AHCI and after installing OS switch to RAID as BIOS setting... what? - use a diskette and F6 while installing win7... really? O.o I thought those times are gone

    Read the article

  • Can someone explain RAID-0 in plain English?

    - by Edward Tanguay
    I've heard about and read about RAID throughout the years and understand it theoretically as a way to help e.g. server PCs reduce the chance of data loss, but now I am buying a new PC which I want to be as fast as possible and have learned that having two drives can considerably increase the perceived performance of your machine. In the question Recommendations for hard drive performance boost, the author says he is going to RAID-0 two 7200 RPM drives together. What does this mean in practical terms for me with Windows 7 installed, e.g. can I buy two drives, go into the device manager and "raid-0 them together"? I am not a network administrator or a hardware guy, I'm just a developer who is going to have a computer store build me a super fast machine next week. I can read the wikipedia page on RAID but it is just way too many trees and not enough forest to help me build a faster PC: RAID-0: "Striped set without parity" or "Striping". Provides improved performance and additional storage but no redundancy or fault tolerance. Because there is no redundancy, this level is not actually a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, i.e. not true RAID. However, because of the similarities to RAID (especially the need for a controller to distribute data across multiple disks), simple strip sets are normally referred to as RAID 0. Any disk failure destroys the array, which has greater consequences with more disks in the array (at a minimum, catastrophic data loss is twice as severe compared to single drives without RAID). A single disk failure destroys the entire array because when data is written to a RAID 0 drive, the data is broken into fragments. The number of fragments is dictated by the number of disks in the array. The fragments are written to their respective disks simultaneously on the same sector. This allows smaller sections of the entire chunk of data to be read off the drive in parallel, increasing bandwidth. RAID 0 does not implement error checking so any error is unrecoverable. More disks in the array means higher bandwidth, but greater risk of data loss. So in plain English, how can "RAID-0" help me build a faster Windows-7 PC that I am going to order next week?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >