Raid 0 with 3vs4 hdds

[MTAtech]

Can this do RAID 5? With RAID 5 you get the benefit of mirroring and striping, so it's faster and redundant. Also, the OS only sees one drive which may alleviate your problem.

[Patton21]

I am wanting raid 0, my extremely important, non replaceable, files are backed up in more than one location.

Doesnt anyone have a suggestion!!!! I have no clue. I have a hard time concluding the raid controller is bad....because it works... All the hard drives, connections, and ports are all working... I just need some ideas

[MTAtech]

RAID 5 is at least as redundant as RAID 0 since the data is replicated over the array of disks. Should a drive fail, the data is secure.

[no1_vern]

Raid 0 is striped, not redundant. Raid 1 is mirrored. He wants speed, not redundancy. Raid 5 is slower than Raid 0. So . . .

The OS will not boot with a 4 drive-raid 0 array, it will on a 3 drive-raid 0 array, but he wants all 4 to be used. I think the real question is WHY wont the INtel raid controller allow a 4 drive-raid 0 to be bootable.

[Nude_Lewd_Man]

Hi,

I know that you've already said that you have checked that the drives are all fine, and that you've been able to boot with three but not four drives attached/installed, but have you tried swapping the drive that you don't use around - just to ensure that it isn't the 4th drive that is stopping it working in this particular setup...?

Just a thought....

[MTAtech]

Quote:

Originally Posted by no1_vern

Raid 0 is striped, not redundant. Raid 1 is mirrored. He wants speed, not redundancy. Raid 5 is slower than Raid 0.

That all depends upon how one interprets his statement: "I am wanting raid 0, my extremely important, non replaceable, files are backed up in more than one location."

Does that mean that his files are already backed up in more than one location or this RAID solution is supposed to provide backed up in more than one location?

RAID 5 (striping and mirroring) is indeed slower than RAID 0 (striping only) but does provide a layer of safety.

[Patton21]

Nude Lewd Man, Thanks for the suggestion...I have already tried that....Anyone else have a idea????

[no1_vern]

Yes, that is the way I took what Patton21 said - that he had his data backed up, and that he wanted just speed.

Patton21 -
When you rotated the drives - was it the same 3 PORTS that worked in creating the 0-Raid or different ports(which ports)? Which set of sata ports do you have the raid set up on(all of them inclusively) and do you have a SATA optical drive on the same controller?? Make sure the Optical drive is the LAST port(port 8), not somewhere in the middle of the string. Also, have you tried to set up the raid without the Optical drive installed?

Yes, I know they say it shouldnt matter, but in the real world, sometimes, it does.

[Patton21]

the four drives are installed on ports 1 through 4. The optical drive is installed on some random port other than 1 through 4.

It was the same three ports that worked. The hard drives are solid; identical caviar blacks.The drives are 640gigs apiece; could that possibley be the problem on Windows 7 64bit? Maybe it doesnt support a 2.5TB drive?

Could this possibly be a jumper issue? The jumper config has not be adjusted; oem.

[Aaron_8015]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patton21

the four drives are installed on ports 1 through 4. The optical drive is installed on some random port other than 1 through 4.

It was the same three ports that worked. The hard drives are solid; identical caviar blacks.The drives are 640gigs apiece; could that possibley be the problem on Windows 7 64bit? Maybe it doesnt support a 2.5TB drive?

Could this possibly be a jumper issue? The jumper config has not be adjusted; oem.

Its not a capasity issue ive seen raid arrays into the 10tb size.... The only jumpers I could imagine they have is to limit the speed from 3.0gb/s to 1.5gb/s.....

This is a strange problem..... I can't really think of any solutions other than just stricking with the 3 drive raid setup (or buying a raid controller).