Mac Pro RAID 1: Correct Drives?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by seanf, Aug 22, 2006.

  1. seanf macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #1
    Hello,

    I'm currently waiting for my mac pro to arrive and am thinking I will buy two 16MB cache drives to replace the one it comes with and set them up as RAID 1. This will leave me with the Mac Pro drive as spare, which I will use for Time Machine when Leopard comes out. Can someone please confirm that this drive is correct for the Mac Pro?

    Thanks

    Sean :)
     
  2. spicyapple macrumors 68000

    spicyapple

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    #2
    Those will work.

    Or you can get the Seagate 320GB HD with SATA-2 interface... these HDs use the new perpendicular recording technology. :)
     
  3. seanf thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    Thank you for your reply. Have you got the model number for these drives? Is the model I linked to not SATA-2?

    Sean :)
     
  4. spicyapple macrumors 68000

    spicyapple

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2006
    #4
    It is. :) SATA-300 is the same as SATA-2, but it's confusing. :)

    I checked on the 320, it's a little less value than the 250.
     
  5. seanf thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #5
    It is! Thank you again for you help

    Sean :)
     
  6. topgunn macrumors 65816

    topgunn

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Location:
    Texas
    #6
    You are going to use RAID 1 AND have a dedicated drive to backup onto? Do you mean RAID 0 by chance?
     
  7. seanf thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #7
    I was thinking RAID 1 would protect against drive failure and provide a (probably quite small) speed increase. I'm open to suggestions though!

    Sean :)
     
  8. godbout macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #8
    I think that you will find that with prices of HD's being SO cheap that it is best to use the RAID1 level over the RAID0 because you will lose no performance over RAID0 and you will have a much safer data environment. Maybe when Timemachine comes out you can think about changing this and regaining some disk space that is taken by the RAID1. Anyways, that is my suggestion.
     
  9. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #9
    Two things:

    1. I don't believe that there is anyway to set up a hardware RAID controller inside a Mac Pro, so if you wanted to do this you'd probably want to do it with external drives.

    2. Time Machine allows you to do a complete system restore, does this not eliminate the need for RAID 1?
     
  10. seanf thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    Location:
    UK
    #10
    You can setup a software controlled RAID, which is supposed to perform just as well as many hardware controllers.

    Sean :)
     
  11. godbout macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #11

    You can do a software RAID implementation, with 4 CPUs there will not be enough over head to matter. Infact i would not be surprized if the HDs are not already contributing to a bottleneck on a system like the MacPro. Also, it is going to be like 7 months before Timemachine is out for redundancy. So I still tend to think that even without having a hardware based RAID1 it is still the best way to go.
     
  12. godbout macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2005
    Location:
    Montreal, Canada
    #12

    Hahaha beat me to it :)
     

Share This Page