Unsure about 2.2TB limit + Raid + UEFI

[icgaln]

Hi,

I’m looking to upgrade my hard drive storage capacity but am running into a few issues I can’t find solid information on.

I have a EX58-UD3R motherboard and Win7 x64. I want to buy 2x ST3000DM001 (http://www.ebuyer.com/319640) and put them in a Raid 1 configuration. The end result being I have 1 mirrored 3TB partition in windows to store stuff on. If one of the drives then fails I don’t lose 3TB of data as the other drive will have it all mirrored and backed up. That’s the plan at least.

What I would like to know is can I do this in regards to MBR, GPT, UEFI/EFI, 2.2TB Limit and Bios limits that makes no sense to me at all?

From what I’ve found out I’m starting to think the answer is no but have no real way of knowing for sure. I’m also unsure if its even possible to have a full 3TB partition in the first place and that it needs to be split up in order for all storage space to be seen, regardless of having a UEFI bios, formatting in GPT and having windows 7 x64.

I don’t want to use any utilities in windows to make things work. I just want to be able to connect up the 2 drives, get to the raid setup screen after post, select the 2 drives make the array and have a 3TB hard drive ready for windows to format as a 3TB partition, like I’ve done previously for 1TB and 2TB hard disk drives. Is this possible?

I don’t want to boot windows from it, I just need it for storage. Its really confusing trying to figure out how this all works.

Any guidance appreciated.

 

[Dereck47]

Read this link, hopefully it will clear things up for you.
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/2581408

 

[ronintexas]

I want to say one thing first - RAID isn't for use as an alternate to a backup. Always backup your data.

Mirroring the drives, allow you to rebuild the drive array quicker, by plugging in a new drive (same size), and rebuilding the array (the mirror will write all the data to the new drive), then you will have access to the data. In a production environment, where up time is absolutely necessary, RAID can rebuild large amounts of data in short time (as compared to restoring from a backup).

For home use, I would recommend using drives in standard mode, and using a utility like SyncBack Free to synchronize the drives in a nightly batch. I have 3 PC's at home, and run data backups from each PC to a backup drive. If a drive dies, I replace it and restore. One large drive handles all of the backups.

RAID can be finicky - I have had an array crash, even when replacing with a same size drive...so a mirrored drive isn't always a guarantee that you will get all of your your data back.

The 2TB max size is the maximum NTFS partition on a normal drive - you can go well beyond that with your mobo. If I remember right it is over 200TB in size (256TB?).

The only reason to use RAID at home would either be the performance of striping drives (theoretically 2X speed - reality 1.4-1.5 speed), or the need for a single volume greater than the capacity of a single drive (i.e. Windows Media Center only gives you the option of a single TV recording location, so if you want a large amount of recording, you need RAID striping).

 

[4745454b]

Right on Ron. RAID1 is not a backup. Icgaln, what happens if your system is hit by lightening (or virus or ???) that is strong enough to take out both drives? Where is your backup now? RAID1 is for uptime, not backups.

UEFI should support 2TB+ I'm not sure how the raid chip will effect things. I assume you'd need a raid chip that supports 2TB+ as well. I wouldn't bother with RAID at home. Not worth the headaches.

 

[icgaln]

Thanks for the replies and that link. I think it certainly helped, wish I had found that previously.

Would still like some sort of confirmation about a couple of things though.

The impression I get from the link is that the issues are really only about if I wanted to boot from a 3TB HD. My concern now is about adding raid into the mix. Does the onboard raid controller not care about the size of the drive and will see them both as 3TB HD’s which I can simply make into 1 mirrored 3TB hard disk like I normally would for a 1TB or 2TB HD?

From how I understood that link it implies that windows 7 x64 will see an uninitiated 3TB disk without issue and even let you initialize it using MBR. The only thing that happens if you do is it will then create 2 partitions limiting the largest to the max of 2.2TB?

So to summarize if I’m just using the disks for storage it doesn’t matter how old my motherboard is or if it has UEFI and that raid will work like normal anyway. All that is an issue is if I select MBR or GPT I’ll have either 2 or 1 partition. Either way I’ll still keep the full 3TB of space, right?

In regards to using raid I understand what you’re saying but for me it’s not exactly about having a backup or protecting the data from lightning or viruses. The reason I wanted to use Raid 1 mirroring is simply because I don’t trust any cheaply priced high capacity drives these days not to fail. I look at the reviews and there are always some for all manufactures that tell of how it failed after 9 months or 2 years. When we were still using 500GB or 1TB drives it was just about acceptable to lose that much data. Moving up to 3TB and 4TB drives though makes me want to try and safe guard it more. To this end I hoped to eliminate my fear of hard drive failure and taking 3TB of data with it by putting 2 of them into a mirrored raid. That way if 1 goes I can swap it out for another one and keep all my data. This seemed like a simple and relatively cheap way of doing this I thought?

Please bear in mind I currently have a system with 10TB of data stored on it. Backing that up manually is not an option I wanted to go down. I was looking for seamless integrated backup to protect against hard drive failure. My plan is to buy 8x 3TB hard drives and put them into pairs using 4x Raid 1 arrays. This will give me an extra 2TB of storage straight away and room for expansion later using raid add-on cards as the space in the system for actual hard drives is 10. This way I’ll free up another 2 more spaces for an additional 3TB of storage later down the road.

 

[bryonhowley]

Most motherboards from the past few years can handle 3tb drives just fine. The only real limit on that is you need x64. If you are not going to boot from it you really only need to make sure that you are using Windows 7 or 8 x64 and a motherboard that supports 3tb drives.

For booting from a 3tb drive you need a motherboard that supports UEFI and have Windows 7 or 8 x64 and the drive must be formatted with GPT partition. I would agree with others on the RAID though for a home user I would not even mess with RAID.

 

[ronintexas]

Your motherboard should create the RAID array without a problem. Backup software like SyncBack Free will do a backup based on changed files. So your first backup will take forever. New backups will only copy new and changed files. I have about 1.3TB of active data I backup nightly, and typically it takes less than 15 minutes to complete. If it were on a local machine only, it would probably be in the 5-7 minute range.

I use RAID at work for large databases and other servers for the purpose of uptime. When a drive fails, you replace that drive, and usually within 30-45 minutes, the system is back up to full speed (it takes that long to rebuild the drive).

RAID will allow access to the data with a failed drive for two purposes: 1 - to backup existing data and 2 - rebuilding the array. Accessing data with a blown drive is a slow process, as the RAID array is dealing with the read/write errors.

The rebuild process is great in that in 30-45 minutes (about 10-15 per TB), it can get you back online. It doesn't guarantee access to the data....The restore process is the same for RAID and non-RAID drives....

You can do anything you want to do - not trying to tell you not to create the RAID array - just saying that the benefits vs. headache for home use (unless you have time critical applications or need a single volume across many drives) isn't worth it....Plus - you are spending 2X the money on the storage.

Consider WD Black drives - they are very reliable. Without going to a drive that is 2-3X the cost, you won't get a more reliable and high performance drive....

 

[icgaln]

Ok I think I’m clear on the whole UEFI, GPT and 2.2TB limit now.

I’m now a little confused about the raid setup. In my mind I envisioned Raid 1 work thus:

HD 1 + HD 2 = Array 1. Store 2.7GB of data on Array 1. In a years time just after the warranty expires HD 2 fails. Buy HD 3, Restore Array 1 using HD 1 + HD 3. Access data. How does this go wrong? If it is unreliable in some way then what’s the point in having it in the first place if the whole idea of mirroring is to help secure data?

Accessing data with a blown drive is a slow process, as the RAID array is dealing with the read/write errors.

It doesn't guarantee access to the data....The restore process is the same for RAID and non-RAID drives....

Not entirely understanding these quotes, am I missing something?
Raid seems to be considered a negative thing like using it can only lead to problems and data loss which is the whole reason I find it attractive to use. Very confused What exactly are the problems or reasons why it is not recommended? What gives the headache? It seems to me its meant to help stop headaches not create them.

The only hard drive manufacture I personally have never had fail on me for any of their drives was Samsung, it’s what I have in my system right now, 10x 1TB Samsung drives. Sadly Seagate does not inspire the same confidence as I’ve had Seagate, WD and Hitachi drives all fail on me and yes even WD Black. By far the worst of the lot were Matrox ones though.

 

[ronintexas]

RAID isn't a negative thing - it works very well if you spend the money for large arrays with solid drives. You will spend about 2X - 3X the money to get the same array - and you will still have the necessity to backup. RAID is great for production, where you can't have any down time. At home, it is inconvenient to not be able to watch a movie or listen to music while restoring data....but not a killer. At work, when you don't have access to a network share - many people can't work....and you pay them to sit on their hands...

SyncBack will create a full backup incrementally daily. If you delete a file, or have a corrupt hard disk, you have instant access to that data. You can even set it up for "realtime synchronization" - many configuration options. It is better than having RAID going....if disaster strikes, you can actually create a share and point your applications to the backed up directory and have everything at your fingertips instantly. It will take longer to restore to a new drive, but the data is 100% available....and the cost is lower....

You also don't have to worry about getting matching drives...

 

[ronintexas]

Headaches include when mixing drives - the rebuild process fails. Typically in a production environment, I have 10-15 drives in an array, and they are all high speed, high dollar drives (SAS 15k drives). I have had rebuilds fail....and a complete restore was necessary....

 

[4745454b]

My issue with RAID in the home use is you don't need what RAID was designed for, "five 9" uptime. You'll be spending x2 for the drives, and the power to use them. You could/should buy the drives, but save the power by only running the second one when you are backing up the data. If you get more then "one" drive, you can probably still get away with using only the one drive for backup. I have 4TB in my computer right now. But I back up my few important files onto my 2TB drive. I don't need to back up everything. Most of my stuff can be downloaded again like FF, Open Office, Steam, etc. Even my games from Steam can as well. I don't need to spend the money on 4TB x2, plus the power to needed to mirror the drives. I don't need "five 9s" uptime, so I don't need RAID. Buying 8x3TB might sound cool, but probably above what you really need.