IDE Raid Question/Survey
This is a discussion about IDE Raid Question/Survey in the Windows Hardware category; I have an Abit VP6 with dual 1ghz runnin win2k. Im booting off a 9. 1g u2w scsi drive and have two 45gb ibm 75gxp's running in raid-0 thru the onboard controller (pri-master and sec-master)as a storage drive.
I have an Abit VP6 with dual 1ghz runnin win2k. Im booting off a 9.1g u2w scsi drive and have two 45gb ibm 75gxp's running in raid-0 thru the onboard controller (pri-master and sec-master)as a storage drive. after seeing how much faster the ide raid is over my scsi drive, i want to get another raid-0 array with two 20gb ibm 60gxp's to boot off of and replace my 9.1gb drive. my question is what is the best way to set this up, i have three options:
Option A:
Run the 40gb stripe on primary master and primary slave
Run the 90gb stripe on secondary master and secondary slave
Option B:
Run the 40gb stripe on primary master and secondary master
Run the 90gb stripe on primary slave and secondary slave
Option C:
Get another ide raid controller and run one stripe on each controller.
Im trying to be frugal and want to try to avoid getting another controller. If the performance would be significantly better by getting a new controller, i would consider it, but i would like to use what i already have.
Any input would be apreciated.
Ultrix
Option A:
Run the 40gb stripe on primary master and primary slave
Run the 90gb stripe on secondary master and secondary slave
Option B:
Run the 40gb stripe on primary master and secondary master
Run the 90gb stripe on primary slave and secondary slave
Option C:
Get another ide raid controller and run one stripe on each controller.
Im trying to be frugal and want to try to avoid getting another controller. If the performance would be significantly better by getting a new controller, i would consider it, but i would like to use what i already have.
Any input would be apreciated.
Ultrix
Participate in our website and join the conversation
This subject has been archived. New comments and votes cannot be submitted.
May 27
May 28
0
2 minutes
Responses to this topic
i would do a same controller setup. I think it will give you less access times, though im not sure on it but i think reading from primary to primary and secondary to secondary is better than primary to secondary slave.
I have a Promise ATA-100 RAID controller.
I also have 4x 45GB IBM ATA-100 Drives.
By default, the Promise controller has setup the following 2 RAID 0 arrays:
Primary Master & Primary Slave
Secondary Master & Secondary Slave
I really don't know if I would get any extra performance from doing Master & Master and Slave & Slave - I'm just assuming the Promise controller knows what it is doing!
I also have 4x 45GB IBM ATA-100 Drives.
By default, the Promise controller has setup the following 2 RAID 0 arrays:
Primary Master & Primary Slave
Secondary Master & Secondary Slave
I really don't know if I would get any extra performance from doing Master & Master and Slave & Slave - I'm just assuming the Promise controller knows what it is doing!
OP
ok, thanks
