The Notebook Review forums were hosted by TechTarget, who shut down them down on January 31, 2022. This static read-only archive was pulled by NBR forum users between January 20 and January 31, 2022, in an effort to make sure that the valuable technical information that had been posted on the forums is preserved. For current discussions, many NBR forum users moved over to NotebookTalk.net after the shutdown.
Problems? See this thread at archive.org.

    Confused about RAID 0+1 and Raid 1+0

    Discussion in 'Hardware Components and Aftermarket Upgrades' started by Hahutzy, Jun 4, 2008.

  1. Hahutzy

    Hahutzy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    126
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Which of the following is RAID 0+1? Which one is 1+0?

    1) 4 HDDs (A, B, C, D), each 10Gb for simplicity.
    First, A+B are put into RAID 0. C+D are also put into RAID 0.
    Then A+B and C+D are put into RAID 1.
    Result: 20Gb, for the system to not work, at least one of A/B and one of C/D must fail

    2) 4 HDDs (A, B, C, D), each 10Gb for simplicity.
    First, A+B in RAID 1, and C+D in RAID 1
    Then, A+B and C+D in RAID 0
    Result: 20Gb, for the system to not work, at least one of A/B and one of C/D must fail.

    Which one has faster average read?
    Which one has faster average write?
    Is it true that both are equally reliable?
     
    Hahutzy, Jun 4, 2008
    #1
  2. sirmetman

    sirmetman Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    679
    Messages:
    3,291
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Why not just RAID 5?
     
    sirmetman, Jun 4, 2008
    #2
  3. Hahutzy

    Hahutzy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    126
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    I'm just confused about the 2 that I mentioned, that's all.
     
    Hahutzy, Jun 4, 2008
    #3
  4. sirmetman

    sirmetman Notebook Virtuoso

    Reputations:
    679
    Messages:
    3,291
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    105
    Ok. Just seems like both of them are overkill. And what notebook can even support 4 RAIDed drives?
     
    sirmetman, Jun 4, 2008
    #4
  5. Greg

    Greg Notebook Nobel Laureate

    Reputations:
    7,857
    Messages:
    16,212
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    466
    Actually, this is the more reliable configuration.

    2x RAID1 ==> 1x RAID0
     
    Greg, Jun 4, 2008
    #5
  6. K-TRON

    K-TRON Hi, I'm Jimmy Diesel ^_^

    Reputations:
    4,412
    Messages:
    8,077
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Yes, greg got it, using two raid 1 configurations, is always safer than using two raid 0 configurations.
    Choice 1 you stated, is Raid 0 + 1
    choice 2 you stated, is Raid 1 + 0.

    Choice 1 will give you slightly higher read and write speeds, but choice 2 will keep your data much safer.

    K-TRON
     
    K-TRON, Jun 4, 2008
    #6
  7. Hahutzy

    Hahutzy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    126
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Thanks for the clarification guys!

    Normally, none; this chain of thought originated from http://forum.notebookreview.com/showpost.php?p=3443327&postcount=92
    Where I was thinking about a setup of 4 CF cards in RAID 0, and then I started looking into different types of RAID settings, which led to this question.
     
    Hahutzy, Jun 5, 2008
    #7
  8. unknowntt

    unknowntt Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    How would you use 4 CF cards? They couldn't all be internal could they? I know the Intel 965 chipset only supports 3 SATA HDDs.

    How would this work? 4 Drives in Raid 1+0 or 0+1??? That'd be pretty neat!
     
    unknowntt, Jun 6, 2008
    #8
  9. Hahutzy

    Hahutzy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    126
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    It's because Addonics came out with SATA-to-Dual-CF adapters.

    I have 2 SATAs on my laptop, hence 4 CFs.
     
    Hahutzy, Jun 6, 2008
    #9
  10. unknowntt

    unknowntt Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    OHHHH I see, makes sense. That actually seems like a good idea. I doubt anyone's done a 4 HDD RAID configuration on it, have they? I'd just like to see how it went.
     
    unknowntt, Jun 6, 2008
    #10
  11. Hahutzy

    Hahutzy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    126
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Hahutzy, Jun 6, 2008
    #11
  12. unknowntt

    unknowntt Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    Holy f**k, RAID 0 on 9 SSDs? Holy f**k....
     
    unknowntt, Jun 6, 2008
    #12
  13. Hahutzy

    Hahutzy Notebook Deity

    Reputations:
    126
    Messages:
    1,237
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    55
    Yep, and mind you, the ~800Mb/sec throughput is capped by the controller processor, which they claim is of enterprise-level already (IOP341).

    The setup was aiming to hit around 1.1Gb/sec initially.
     
    Hahutzy, Jun 6, 2008
    #13
  14. unknowntt

    unknowntt Notebook Evangelist

    Reputations:
    94
    Messages:
    652
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    30
    So if it wasn't bottlenecked by the controller, then WOW. Just wow...
     
    unknowntt, Jun 6, 2008
    #14