Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fastest RAID card?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fastest RAID card?

    Ok, I did a and didn't come up with anything, so hopefully I won't get flamed for asking this question.

    I know that RAID 0 (disk striping) speeds up read times, but doesn't usually help boot-up speeds simply because RAID controllers take several seconds to initalize the array. So my question is, are there any RAID controller cards or built-on controllers that don't take that long, perhaps ones that can save a setting and recall instantly on bootup?

    Also, are RAID array speeds any different for SATA vs. PATA hard drive arrays?

  • #2
    You really don't need a RAID for a carputer. What are you reasons for using a raid?

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by gardocki
      Ok, I did a and didn't come up with anything, so hopefully I won't get flamed for asking this question.

      I know that RAID 0 (disk striping) speeds up read times, but doesn't usually help boot-up speeds simply because RAID controllers take several seconds to initalize the array. So my question is, are there any RAID controller cards or built-on controllers that don't take that long, perhaps ones that can save a setting and recall instantly on bootup?
      No. RAID controllers have their own BIOS that needs to initialize. That adds to the POST time. You can't get around it.

      Also, are RAID array speeds any different for SATA vs. PATA hard drive arrays?
      SATA drive arrays are faster simply because they can transfer faster. It's not so fast that you'd notice the difference, though.

      LaserLine is correct. You don't need a RAID array in your car. You're daft if you think you do.
      Have you looked in the FAQ yet?
      How about the Wiki?



      Under normal circumstances, a signature would go here.

      Comment


      • #4
        Will increase boot times, power consumption and heat.

        Comment


        • #5
          Plus, all current "SATA" drives are just PATA drives with another chip on them to convert them to SATA connectors. Therefore they are no faster. Especially as all these drives are still only 7200 RPM.

          The exception to this is the Western Digial Raptor which is a native SATA drive with 10k RPM.


          Garry
          Co-Developer of A.I.M.E.E
          www.aimee.cc

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by UK_MP3Car
            Will increase boot times, power consumption and heat.
            And will also increase your likelihood of having a fatal error, as there are now two big spinning disks waiting for the heads to crash into the platters
            Co-Developer of A.I.M.E.E
            www.aimee.cc

            Comment


            • #7
              late 7200.7s were seagates first native satas

              As for a stripe, dont do it - seriously you wont do yourself any favours if it crashes.

              BUT, ive long pondered how effective running RAID1 mirror for redundancy would be- Its a bit academic atm since I have not got my instal complete but one thing that worries me is people here reporting HDD crashes or corruption and I wonder if a mirror setup might save the day, instead of having to reload an image (or worse, reinstal from scratch).

              The jurys out on that one, plus many are starved of PCI slots so would find it hard to add a raid card on anyway.

              Comment


              • #8
                I recommend a 3Ware Escalade pci card. It will run you about $130+ but it is quality, but why do you need raid in the car? those are the cards i run in my servers and they are great.
                1990 Jeep Cherokee
                2000 VW Golf TDI 4dr
                2005 VW GTI MKIV - SOLD

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DarquePervert
                  You don't need a RAID array in your car. You're daft if you think you do.
                  I beg to differ.

                  I run a software RAID-5 array of 3x300GB 5400rpm drives. Why? Because I like the idea of having all of my music available to me, whenever I might want it. Bowie's "Life on Mars?" - no problem. Radiohead's "Creep?" - right here. Chopin's "Revolutionary Etude?" - gotcha.

                  I'd like to state, DarquePervert, that when one knowest not whereof one speaketh, one's mouth is best used for chewing.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by rubicon
                    I beg to differ.

                    I run a software RAID-5 array of 3x300GB 5400rpm drives. Why? Because I like the idea of having all of my music available to me, whenever I might want it. Bowie's "Life on Mars?" - no problem. Radiohead's "Creep?" - right here. Chopin's "Revolutionary Etude?" - gotcha.

                    I'd like to state, DarquePervert, that when one knowest not whereof one speaketh, one's mouth is best used for chewing.
                    1) Unless your in a mission critical environment, allocating three HDDs to get the redundant, striped storage space of one HDD is excessive, in my opinion. You get some geek cred points, though.
                    2) You don't need a RAID array in a car, period. You state very plainly that you like the idea of having whatever tune available whenever. You don't need it.
                    3) If redundancy is important to you, a RAID 1 array would be a lot cheaper to pull off than RAID 5 and would have fewer points of failure. That's something that I'd deeply consider in a harsh environment like a vehicle.
                    4) You're runnign a sotware-controlled array. This discussion is of hardware-based RAID controllers. You're comparing apples to oranges.

                    I'm not putting down your RAID array in your car. I can certainly appreciate your logic behind it. 100% uptime is always a good thing. I think the risks & expense outweigh the benefits in this case.
                    Have you looked in the FAQ yet?
                    How about the Wiki?



                    Under normal circumstances, a signature would go here.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by DarquePervert
                      1) Unless your in a mission critical environment, allocating three HDDs to get the redundant, striped storage space of one HDD is excessive, in my opinion. You get some geek cred points, though.
                      I'm doing it because there're no 600GB HDDs (yet), and even if there were, the environment of an automobile would most likely contribute to an early failure, necessitating redundancy.
                      Originally posted by DarquePervert
                      2) You don't need a RAID array in a car, period. You state very plainly that you like the idea of having whatever tune available whenever. You don't need it.
                      Ok, so that's true.
                      Originally posted by DarquePervert
                      3) If redundancy is important to you, a RAID 1 array would be a lot cheaper to pull off than RAID 5 and would have fewer points of failure. That's something that I'd deeply consider in a harsh environment like a vehicle.
                      But I'd be getting 300GB less space from a RAID-1 2x300GB than a RAID-5 3x300GB. This isn't only about redundancy.
                      Originally posted by DarquePervert
                      4) You're runnign a sotware-controlled array. This discussion is of hardware-based RAID controllers. You're comparing apples to oranges.
                      True, but your statement "You don't need a RAID array in your car. You're daft if you think you do." didn't discriminate between SW vs. HW RAID. Besides, I think its important for folks to know that SW RAID is a viable option, and that some (like me) won't ever use HW RAID again, having been burned in the past. Once bitten, and all.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X