Fast HDD Setup?

[ElectroGoofy]

Hello, all.

I currently have one 1tb HDD in my comp, and this seems to be my bottleneck, so I would like to increase read/write speeds.

I am thinking about maybe getting 2x 500gb HDDs and putting them in RAID 0, then use my 1tb as backup (in case one of the two 500gb drives fails).

I have been doing some reading and have heard that certain setups of RAID 1 actually outperform RAID 0... found it at http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/250390-32-does-raid-increase-read-speed (under sub mesa's posts). They mentioned that it was possible on Linux, but that was back in 2009, so I am wondering if there is a way to do it under Windows.

Now would having the 1tb HDD for backup slow down performance, or is there a way for it to actually contribute to read speed? Also, what type of RAID would it be considered? A variation of RAID 0+1 or something?

Also, I have been reading about short-stroking hard drives... I like the idea that it greatly increases performance, but don't really like that it decreases storage size... My main thing is boot time, is there a way to constrain the OS to only the outter, say 10% of the disks? That way on bootup it would get that extra speed, but while the computer is on I would still have full capacity. I'm guessing I would need to setup a separate partition for the OS or something?

Any other info, like if there are faster RAID alternatives, are welcome!

Thanks!

P.S. Yea, I know SSDs are much faster than HDDs... they are substantially more expensive for the amount of space, so can't really justify the price, as it is not absolutely necessary...

 

[tokencode]

RAID 0 definitely outperforms RAID 1 in every category except access time which they would be equal. Your plan is sound as long as your backing the data up to anoter drive.

The theory on RAID 1 being faster would only apply with random reads that are less than 1 block in size and you get 1/2 the usable space.

High quality enterprise class 15k SAS drives are signifcantly faster but are almost the cost of SSDs per GB. RAID 0 will decrease bootime but I think you're better off with a smaller SSD personally if that's your main concern.

I would just image your HD to your backup drive nightly and retain a few days of images.

 

[ElectroGoofy]

RAID 0 definitely outperforms RAID 1 in every category except access time which they would be equal. Your plan is sound as long as your backing the data up to anoter drive.

The theory on RAID 1 being faster would only apply with random reads that are less than 1 block in size and you get 1/2 the usable space.

High quality enterprise class 15k SAS drives are signifcantly faster but are almost the cost of SSDs per GB. RAID 0 will decrease bootime but I think you're better off with a smaller SSD personally if that's your main concern.

I would just image your HD to your backup drive nightly and retain a few days of images.

Thanks for the reply

Yea... a SSD would be nice, but a bit pricey. Bootup time is not my only concern, so if RAID 0 would increase my overall speed, that would be great... just don't really want to chunk out the money for a SSD

Hmm.... do drive images take less space than the actual information on a hard drive? Also, is there a realtime backup solution, or something that would backup when inactive?

Oh, and also, about how much of a real-world increase of read/write speeds are there? (approximate percentage)

Now, just wondering, in RAID 0, how big are the drive stripes? In the pictures it shows many gigs of info in one chunk, but I'd imagine that would be no different in speed from a single hard drive... so are the stripes in chunks of a few kB, or smaller/larger?

(Also, still looking for answers on some of the other questions)


EDIT: Hmm... just looked at SSDs again... it actually looks like a 60gb SSD wouldn't cost a ton more than 2x 500gb HDDs, anyway... even in the 400-500 MB/s read/write range. I mean, sure there isn't redundancy if I went that route, but will look into them some more...

Still open for answers to questions, though.

 

[RetiredChief]

Use the concept of short stroke.
Put the two 500 gig HDDs in raid0 config. Create the first stripped volume using 20->30 % of the drive. Here is the diff; create the 2nd volume using the remainder of the drive. Put your operatinge system and programs on the first raid0 volume. This will keep the operating system and programs on the outer portion of the platers. Use volume two (may also partition this volume under windows) for your data.

Windows will show two HDDs (Drive0 and drive 1), NOT a single HDD0. If you run a benchmark on the "C" drive it will show performance close to a "True" short stroked drive, However probably not accurate most likely somewheres between shortstroked and non. Did this to a pair of WD 640s and Access time for drive0 whas decreased from 12.6 mSec down to approx 9.5.

Added:
Yes SSd is the way to go - But it is a cost/performance issue and largly a personnal one. My recommendation on size is Min 80 gig, recommended 100 -> 128 gig