HDD Options - Single Drive or Raid0

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by bbadalucco, Sep 8, 2009.

  1. bbadalucco macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    #1
    So I'm having a hard time deciding what to do with my two open HDD bays in my Mac Pro. I know I want to add more storage, but I'm not sure if I should use Raid0 or not. I store most of my media on a server but wanted to store the following in my MacPro and would need more hdd space.

    iTunes Library
    Pictures
    Bootcamp - obviously can't store in server
    Scratch drive - would write handbrake encodes to this then transfer to server

    In all I'll need around 1.5tb

    I already have a 1.5tb drive and would only consider buying another to put them into raid0. Should I bother with raid0 for the increased speed or just use the 7200RPM 1.5tb drive I already have?

    This is all for my personal use but I like my system fast. I have a time capsule to use as a backup if needed.
     
  2. gugucom macrumors 68020

    gugucom

    Joined:
    May 21, 2009
    Location:
    Munich, Germany
    #2
    RAID0 the two drives and cut off the bottom 50%. They will run considerably faster that way than one drive close to capacity.
     
  3. bbadalucco thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    #3
    Great thanks for the input. What do you mean by cut off the bottom 50%? Are you just saying don't use that space or format the drive so they are smaller?
     
  4. Wotan31 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    #4
    I would RAID0 them for speed, but make DAMN sure you have a firewire drive in your desk drawer, and use it to make regular backups. Data loss potential with RAID0 is doubled vs. using a single drive.

    I run RAID0 and I do a full backup to an external firewire disk every 2 weeks, using Carbon Copy Cloner.
     
  5. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #5
    I like my RAID0 a lot. I wouldn't give it up after having become used to the nice speed. But two points are worth mentioning here I think.

    1. You can't put bootcamp on an Apple RAID and you can't see an Apple RAID from the windows side at all.

    2. Two drives in a RAID0 is better sure, but not enough to justify doing it IMHO. With 3 drives you'll be happy and you'll be ecstatic useing a 4-Drive RAID0. But with only two you'll mumbling to yourself a lot things like: Is this any faster, I'm not sure, where's my stop-watch?
     
  6. Mac Husky macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Location:
    Bavaria, Germany
    #6
    I knew you would say that reading this thread :D
     
  7. Carnivor macrumors regular

    Carnivor

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    #7
    If you got 3 drives you could raid 5 them, say x3 1.5tbs, you'd have 3tb storage and be covered if any of the drives fails.
     
  8. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    RAID 5 would mean getting another controller for lots of $$$.
     
  9. Carnivor macrumors regular

    Carnivor

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    #9
    didnt know that! can you raid 0+1 or 1+0 then?
     
  10. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #10
    The idea is to keep the data on the outermost tracks, which are the fastest on the drive.

    You can do it either way. If it were a windows installation on a PC, partitions would make more sense, but OS X it seems, does better at keeping the files at the front (outer tracks, from information I've gotten out of Tesselator. ;) So you can just keep the capacity lower than half the total (50% mark or less).

    Yes.

    OS X is capable of 0/1/0+1/1+0 arrays. :)
     
  11. Tesselator macrumors 601

    Tesselator

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2008
    Location:
    Japan
    #11
    And JBOD too. (AKA: Concatenation).
     
  12. nanofrog macrumors G4

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    #12
    DOH! Missed that one (the outcast child in array types). :eek: :p
     

Share This Page