kanataguy

Ok, I think you have made valid points about keeping disk partitions to a minimum. I had read this article that seemed to make sense to me, and the reasons provided also seemed valid (http://icrontic.com/articles/os_setup_guide_2005). I guess for some reason, the idea of having the drive physically divided seemed more secure, and easier to manage when it came time to perform disk images. I think I would at the very least create an OS/Programs/pagefile partition (C:) and then leave the rest to folders for separating. Now, getting back to the RAID options. RAID10 sounds excellent, however I don't have the budget for a 4th drive at this time. So, I am considering the following: OS and Programs - 2 x 320G HDD as RAID0 Files and Data - 2 x 500G HDD as RAID1 Backups - 1 500G HDD Thanks for the driver links nmX.Memnoch. I was able to successfully integrate them into an nLite'd copy of XP, and the key to having Windows boot without the BSOD is to enable the RAID BIOS option BEFORE installing XP with the RAID drivers integrated. So... tonight I will attach my 2 320G drives, and then all 5 SATA drives will be connected. Once I can wipe the OS drives, I will use them to create a RAID0 array, and then do the same with the 2 500G drives for my RAID1 backups array. I have a few outstanding questions before starting the create the RAID volumes tonight. 1) Can both a RAID0 and RAID1 array be used without much performance hit using the on-board ICH8R controller? 2) Is it fairly easy to recover/troubleshoot from a drive that becomes corrupt or out of synch? I have no concept of what I am getting into should I experience errors with a RAID volume. I will have all my data backed up on the non-RAID 500G drive, and I will also have OS drive backup images (using Acronis True Image) for easy re-installation. Is the worst thing that could happen is I lose a drive and I'll have to replace it? Can the RAID volumes be "re-built" fairly easily? Can you tell I have no experience with RAID failures? 3) cluberti mentioned something about "mount points" in a RAID volume. Can someone clarify? Does this have anything to do with partitions? From my limited experience, when creating the RAID0 or RAID1 arrays, I will simply choose the 2 disks in the CTL-I boot menu. Is it possible somehow to "mount" folders or drive partitions, rather than using the entire drive? Is there any use for this? As I have a lot of storage (2x320G plus 3x500G), should I be aware of different ways to create or mount these RAID volumes? Ok, that should do it. Phew ... I will appreciate any advice and recommendations, upon which I can then plan to create the best RAID solution - I am looking forward to getting my feet wet in this new domain!

A big THANK-YOU to Zxian, nmX.Memnoch and those who responded, as I found your detailed replies to be most helpful! I was rather impressed to receive such prompt assistance from my first post. Obviously these forums are the place to go for up-to-date information. getting back to my RAID scenarios ... I like Zxian's idea about keeping the OS, software, pagefile, temp files, etc. on a separate RAID1 or RAID0. I do have a pair of 320G SATAII Seagates that I could possibly devote to the OS and Program Files RAID. Perhaps the best use for my 3 500G drives is to mirror 2 of them as RAID1, and leave the 3rd 500G for backups. I am worried that without a dedicated RAID controller, I might not benefit from configuring the 3 500G drives as RAID5. I am still trying to install (integrate using nLite) the proper Intel RAID/AHCI drivers for ICH8R prior to installing a slipstreamed copy of WinXP. There is limited documentation about when you enable the BIOS option to RAID or AHCI, as in BEFORE or AFTER you have those drivers installed. I think I am finally getting somewhere, but that is slightly off-topic. nmX.Memnoch does seem to favour the RAID10 setup, and why not with such a balance between redundancy and performance. My only issue is that can my on-board ICH8R controller make any of this happen? I am starting to doubt if it's even worthwhile to consider a RAID5 array that uses the motherboard's controller. I think given that fact, I might try to stick to using a RAID0 setup for 2 drives for my OS, Program Files, etc. (I save disk images often) and then consider a RAID1 for 2 of the 500G drives with the 3rd one used for backups. Does this seem reasonable? Can my P5B-Deluxe on-board RAID controller support these two options (2x320G as RAID0, and 2x500G as RAID1), but more importantly, will there be a noticeable hit on performance with this scenario? I am able to get clean all of these drives with an external hard drive, so there won't be any issue of having important data on any of these drives during a RAID setup. I would start fresh with empty drives. I just thought of something... What about disk partitions? Are these irrelevant in a RAID0/RAID1 setup? I typically have my drive divided into several partitions (C:WinXP/Progs, D:Pagefile, E:Games, F:MyDocs, G:Backups, H:Installers, G:Downloads, H:Music, I:Pictures, J:Temp, etc.) Does this have any impact on a RAID array? Will these partitions simply be striped or mirrored when created across the other drive? Can I create a RAID0 or RAID1 using a disk that has already been partitioned, or do I need to start from scratch, and partition the RAID drives once the RAID is built? Many thanks again for your prompt and detailed replies, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on my latest questions. Oh and Zxian, I am from Ottawa.

I am trying to decide whether or not to use a RAID array in my new system, or to use a software backup solution to protect my digital files. I have 3 500G SATA hard drives, and I can't decide what the best configuration would be, to acheive a balance of file security (i.e. RAID 1/5 or software backup/disc imaging) and performance, assuming that there might be some improvements in system performance with a RAID solution. I have about 250G of music and images that I need to safeguard, so I thought either a RAID 1 or 5 option might accomplish that, but in the past I have always just backed up my data to another drive, and also kept up-to-date disk images for system repair. My concerns are that trying to get and maintain a RAID array with multiple hard drives could prove challenging and might lead to increased down-time and/or having to troubleshoot issues. Here are the scenarios that I can see as options. I decided to put this question to a more experienced audience, so I am kindly asking if others could simply point out which scenario seems to make the most sense. Motherboard: ASUS P5B-Deluxe motherboard, that uses the Intel ICH8R SATA RAID controller Hard drives: 3 x = 500G SATA II Seagate 7200.10 Possible Choices: #1. Non-RAID (IDE) DISK1 as IDE with all software and data DISK2 and DISK 3 used to store backups of files on DISK1 pros: easy to troubleshoot if system/disks become corrupt, most compatible method where drivers are concerned cons: not gaining benefits of using AHCI/RAID, backups must be done manually #2. RAID0 DISK1 and DISK2 striped as RAID0 to offer best performance benefits DISK3 used to store backups of files on DISK1/2 pros: performance benefits cons: no data safety, have to replace a drive if RAID breaks, experience system down-time, hard to fix? #3. RAID1 DISK1 and DISK2 mirrored to provide drive/data copy for safety benefits pros: data safety through disk mirroring, easier to fix if one drive becomes corrupt as array is not broken cons: slight decrease in write speeds? #4. RAID5 DISK1 and DISK2 and DISK3 used in a RAID5 array to provide best mix of performance and safety benefits pros: performance and safety gains - no down-time if disk is corrupt cons: possible decrease in performance by using on-board ICH8R SATA RAID controller? As I am not that RAID-savvy, I have made some assumptions about what the pros and cons might be for each scenario, but they might not even be correct, which is also why I am putting this question out there. I would greatly appreciate any thoughts on what the best option(s) might be, given the motherboard/RAID controller I am using and the desire to preserve data safety, while minimizing any down-time or having to troubleshoot/replace drives if a RAID array becomes corrupt. My sincerest thanks for any any helpful feedback!