/raid/ RAID general. You should always buy your hard drives in

>>55776964
>raiding harddrives
is there even any point to this any more, just buy an ssd like a normal person

>>55776976
>is there even any point to this any more, just buy an ssd like a normal person

Don't feel like buying a 3tb ssd, my 1tb ssd was $300.

My 3tb drive is slow as fuck, gonna buy another and raid 0 that shit.

>>55776976
example: 2x 250 gb ssds with raid0 will have about 2x read and write speed of a single 500gb ssd.

File: 2016-07-27_02-37-19.png (2MB, 2679x1299px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2679x1299px

>>55776976
raid ssds imo

>>55776964
Are there any good (windows) software raid 6 solution?

how do i raid 0 2 hdds for the system (desktop) and set up another one for backup?

>>55777041
no. buy a raid card if you own a desktop. or check your motherboard manual

>>55776964
>and a raid 0 drive for gaming.
Lol, use a RAMdisk for gaming. 64 GB for $230 + $30 for dimmdrive. Even using the slowest DDR4 random request latency and 4k throughput blow out 4 SSDs in RAID 0.

>>55777062
>another one
meaning another hdd

... or another raid for backup?

>>55777062
You go to google.

>copypasted shit in OP
>knew this was a help thread

>>55777072
why not both.
I also like to have a lot of ram

>>55777072
>put your RAM drives in raid0

>>55777115
>buy 10 sd-mmc cards
>raid 10
>ludicrous speed/price

File: absolutely halal.jpg (72KB, 640x539px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 640x539px

>>55776964
>Something something RAID0 nonsense
For what purpose? Performance? I don't play video games, so "more fps" or whatever isn't an answer. And mdadm does a better job than your mobo's FakeRAID implementation. Or are you not running Linux?

Anyhow, I always run RAID1. Full parity or bust, motherfuckers, and I've never lost a byte of data. My current workstation runs:
- 2x Samsung 950 PRO NVMe 256GB in RAID1
- 2x HGST Deskstar 4TB in RAID1
- Some old Corsair SSD repurposed as an 80GB swap partition because I have nothing better to do with it.

>>55777144
it's a free country brother
why do you hate freedom so much
voting for hillary soon?

File: h2kfGPp.jpg (17KB, 284x339px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 284x339px

ZFS RAIDZ
>inflexible, can't add more drives to existing array
>sucks vast quantities of RAM
>autists say it kills itself if you don't buy expensive ECC hardware

BTRFS RAID
>still beta
>still has write-hole problem

Storage Spaces + REFS
>Windows only

>>55777063
>raid card

They're expensive as fuck.

>>55777144
>could have 8.58tb of data at his disposal
>only has 4.36
ewww how can you fit all your animu on such little space

>>55777982
There are a lot of sub $100 LSI raid cards on ebay.

>>55778029
That don't do Raid 6

>raid ssd's on LSI and realise you dont have trim anymore

let's say i have 2 512gb ssd drives in a laptop with a 1tb 7200rpm drive in an optical drive caddy. can i use software raid0 on the two ssd drives then use raid1 with the ssd raid0 array and the 1tb drive? would it be easier to use rsync with cron?

>>55778180

also on this, if i install an m2 drive to boot from can i just use storage spaces in windows 8.1/10 and not have to worry about this raid stuff? would storage spaces like that affect performance?

>>55777187
>expensive ECC hardware
Wat.
1-3 generation old workstations/entry level servers are cheap as fuck these days.
And if you absolutely have to buy new stuff AMD doesen't jew as hard as Intel when it comes to hardware that supports ECC.

Im in the process of researching for my first NAS.
So far, I'm leaning towards 3 WD Reds (2TB or 3TB) in a Btrfs Raid5 for my media collections, plus a single 1TB drive for onedrive backup.
Is this reasonable?

I think I'll hook them up to a recent pentium and 4GB ddr3 ram, in a node 804 from fractal.

How about ECC and a hardware raid controller? Are they even worth it in a minor server like this?
Pls feedpack pls

>>55777018
Thats not even true lmao, look it up

>>55778071
>he thinks the higher the number the better technology it is. he's probably waiting for raid 7 like he's waiting for apple a10 chip

>>55778180
>>55778275
gtfo my board normal fag REEEEEEEE
you cant do that

>homemade porn

Post?

>>55778590
raid 5 is a meme. go for raid 10. you'll be better off in the long run. also, how many drives are you throwing in? ecc certainly is a meme for home users, it's made for casinos banks and ATMs, it's not for your fucking porn server. kek
I would never raid 5 my pc, ever. 50 is a differnt story. 5 is slow as fuck. it's not for your home, it's too cost oriented. performance scales terribly it's the slowest raid solution, you dont wanna sacrifice power in exchange of space and reliability at a fucking home. also rebuilding takes forever. it's pure shit. you either go for raid 10 for all drives or merge many drives using raid 0 for gaming drive, 2 drives merged by raid 1 for OS drive

>>55777187
That's why you use XFS over LVM.
ZFS and BTRFS are hipster shit.

>>55776964

RAID is meant for uptime. It has no place on non-server and non-mission critical system.

RAID 0 = pants-on-retarded unless it is a scratch disk

RAID 1 = poor man's imaging back-up solution

RAID-5 = retarded version of RAID 0

RAID-6 = minimal if you care about actual fault tolerance.

>>55777031

Enjoy losing that data.

>>55780856
that's so ignorant
>>55780877
uses 1 hdd, doesnt expect a hard drive failure within 15 years.
use 2 hdds, suddenly the predicted end of life for a hard drive is 2 weeks.

>>55781111

>implying that modern HDDs last longer than 3 years without headers crashing

HDD reliability has gone to shit in the past ten years. Seagate and WD being the worse offenders.

File: tvnviewer_2016-07-27_10-15-44.png (1MB, 1922x1156px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1922x1156px

>>55781251
My current 2 TB Seagate drive has been up and running for 24,400+ hours already and has never shown a hint of fucking up.

2 disks - RAID1
3 disks - RAID5
4 disks or more - RAID10

>>55779231

storage spaces does what i need and raid/linux can puck my senis.

dumb question here. But can you raid 0 SSD's and improve performance?

>>55781851
You can, and it'll improve performance but all your data will be gone if one of the drives fail.

Sqt here
If I have 6 drives in Raid 0, and one of the drives suddenly dies, then I lose all of the data on all 6 drives, yes?

>>55782154
dude stop scaring people
buy 20 drives, use raid 1
what if a meteor strikes my pc? is my anime collection safe?
same mentality applies to gun control
>>55782183
yes. but they wont fail. also, you are more likely to rage delete everything.
hard drives, unless you fucking shake them like a child during operation, dont fail suddenly, and windows tells you if the hard drive is failing, by reading S.m.a.r.t values.

>>55782154
ah so that's how raid works eh. really don't know too much about it. seems like something that i don't need for my ways

>>55776964
>guide to buying HDDs
>HDDs
>despite the current year

pure 100% columbian uncut cancer

>>55782227
>dude stop scaring people
>scaring

I just said that it adds another point of failure and increases the chance of data loss. I never said anything about the probability of a drive failure nor how safe raid 0 is. Learn to read.

>>55777141
>Sd
>Fast
Nigga they struggle to hit 50 mb in real world use

>>55782309
MUH RANDOM READ SPEED
for the same price of a 1 tb ssd, you can actually buy 6 tb hard drives and a raid controller and raid 10 them, you get about the same speed with at least 3x space for the same money. also after 1 month your ssd write speed will be 1/4 of the marketed speed. you dont even need sata 3 for that

>>55776964
>you fell for the windows software raid meme
>disks resynching for 4 hours every time after a long sleep or shut down

>>55782584
literally who the fuck needs that much space? I can't think of anything that would need so much space aside from thousands of whole-system backups or archives. 1TB is unnecessary for almost everyone.

>>55778016
10bit encodes ?

>RAID general
This has gone too far.

>>55782653
family videos in h264 high profile@1080p60

>>55779220
I want double drive redundancy