I never understand why so many people show such fear or dislike for raids.
Look here for some background: Adobe Forums: To RAID or not to RAID, that is the...
Then look at the http://ppbm4.com benchmark results and see that all the top performers have (massive) raids. Systems with the same CPU and memory but without raid perform 3 to 4 times slower.
Not fear or dislike of raids but just wondering if the extra investment is worth the time saving i got from editing AVCHD since I read about someone mentioning that the CPU and RAM should be good enough to handle the compressed AVCHD.
If i go for raid 30 setup, does it mean that i can remove the 2nd disk which i have initially intended for scratch? Also any good reference for setting up a raid 30 as I have no experience in raid setup. Thanks
Is it possible that they are nervous about all the reports on losing data?
Or possibly setting it up correctly for the first time by a novice?
Got 3 of the Samsung F3s delivered today.
Here is what I plan to do with the HDs...Let me know if you agree
System - Intel G2 80gb SSD
Media - Samsung F3 (2x Raid 0)
Scratch - Samsung F3 (1x)
Raid 0 will run on the on-board Marvell SATA 3
Is it worth it to add another F3 or more to the mix?
At $60 each, I'm more than happy to add additional F3s (500gb)
An additional disk is always welcome. I would then use two raid0 of 2 disks each.
I have decided to go with Raid30, and need your comments on my following setup
a) 1st Hard Disk - OS
b) 2nd Hard Disk - Scratch Disk including Windows Page File
c) Hard disks configured as Raid 30
You do realize that a raid3 requires at least three disks and for a raid30 you need to stripe two raid3 arrays, so the minimum number of disks for a raid30 is 6.
The performance of a six disk raid30 will be somewhat less than a 4 disk raid0 on a good controller, but will have redundancy, and can recover from the failure of one disk is each raid3.
The only raid controller that I know to handle raid3 and raid30 is the Areca ARC. Currently the 1680-iX models are the best in their line up, but the successor has been announced, the 1880iX, but not yet readily available.
Your setup looks fine to me.
I also realised from one of your post on a screenshot of your system, and also remember reading something about having raid 0 for the scratch disk. If I am going to get the areca arc, should I also go for similar setup for the performance?
Is there any benefit to going Raid 0 x4 verus x2? (intended told hold the media files)
Do you even need that kind of bandwith for AVCHD and .mov (Canon 5d2)?
I noticed that your screenshot has the media 12x on Raid 30
Thanks again! Chris
No, 2 disk raid0 is more than enough bandwidth and going beyond that only increases the chance of losing all data in case 1 disk fails.
That is the reason I went for this massive array, storage space, speed AND redundancy. I may even add 2 additional disks, forfeit the 2 single disks and extend my raid30 to 16 x 1 TB Raid30, including 2 hot-spares.
Thanks for all the comments and has been helpful in setting up my computer.
Btw, I have a question related to areca raid card. I noticed tha the setting for the following are disable:
a) Time to Hdd Low Power Idle
b) Time to Low RPM Mode
c) Time to Spin Down Idle Hdd
Shouldnt those setting not left to disable for power management of the hard disk?
has anybody tried out to edit 1080 60p footage from new Panasonic TM700 camcorder? I am going to buy this camcorder and also a new computer to manage the editing. It would be very helpfull if somebody can tell me, if this system is powerfull enough to do the job:
- 8 GB RAM
- one system disc, one schratch disc and one storage disc. No Raid.
I have everything power saving related turned off on my system. The only thing I do use is staggered spin-up to reduce the load on the PSU when booting. It increases my boot time, but is better than having 12 disks kick in at the same time.
With these specs you should be OK.