| Home | Forums | What's new | Resources | |
| Western Digital 8 Meg Cache HD |
| slinga - Aug 11, 2003 |
| 1 | 2 | Next> |
 |
slinga | Aug 11, 2003 | ||
|
Hey everyone, I've heard great things about the WD 8 Meg Cache drives. I was all set to buy a couple (set up software raid 5 *drool*), but I don't know what cable I need. Here's the hard disk...... I need a IDE cable that preferrably allows 3 devices to be connected (IE 4 connecters). Also does the motherboard need anything special? Thanks in advance. | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 11, 2003 | ||
|
I see, I only have 2 ide slots on my motherboard, looks like I'll need one of those expansion things that give you another IDE slot... Back to my question though, does my motherboard need anything special? And damn that's the second post today I had moved  | ||||
 |
racketboy | Aug 11, 2003 | ||
|
you can have 4 IDE devices total -- but that includes your optical drives too. You should have 2 channels -- each with up to 2 devices. otherwise you would need a PCI card controller for more | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 11, 2003 | ||
|
Thanks Racketboy, I think I got it now... bah I'll order in the morning...stupid mold affecting brain... | ||||
 |
Alexvrb | Aug 11, 2003 | ||
|
Man, you've got some strange ideas. Expansion thingies? You mean a PCI IDE card? OK, why exactly do you want to use RAID 5, is data redundancy that important? Why not use RAID 10 at that point, 4 drives and its simpler. Also, how does one use SOFTWARE RAID 5?? With Two drives? RAID 5 requires I believe a minimum of 3 drives, and its very complex and would (if possible to run in software at all) seriously slow down your system. Maybe you meant software RAID 0, which *also* affects your overall system performance. To do it right, get a RAID card that supports the RAID mode you want, or a mainboard that supports it. As ExCyber said, there's a max of 2 drives per channel. BUT, for a RAID solution its a bad idea to use more than one drive on the same channel for a 2-3 drive RAID setup. They have to share the channel, master and slave that is (SATA has done away with this, one channel, one drive). For example, you could partly negate the speed advantage of a 2-drive RAID 0 array by putting both drives on the same channel. So if you're bent on RAID 5, you'd prefereably want a card with 4 IDE connectors (i dont think they have 3-connector models), with RAID 0 a decent 2-connector raid card would be perfect. | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 12, 2003 | ||
|
I didn't know what those expansion cards were called... <_< Forgive me, I spent the last ten weeks implementing SCSI raids  Windows 2k Server has software raid, but I believe it only has Raid 0, 0+1, and 5. Will it slow down my machine, I have no idea, but I highly doubt it (at worst a learning experience). My plan is this, buy 4 Western Digital hard drives with 8 meg cache. 1 40 gig to boot off, and 3 120 gig to be raided, and used only as storage. As far as I know, raid 5 is always atleast 3 disks. Since I'm finallly going off to college, and I know for a fact running servers is not an issue, I'm going to use this as my own server in school. Is redudancy important? Somewhat. I don't want to lose all my data of course (the stuff I can't burn to cd to backup). P.S. - the mold is affecting me | ||||
|
racketboy | Aug 12, 2003 | ||
|
redundancy is very good for preventing data loss. if one drive dies, you still have the data on another. | ||||
 |
Scared0o0Rabbit | Aug 12, 2003 | ||
| I'd suggest just getting a raid card.... they aren't THAT expensive (especially with how much you are talking about spending on hard drives)... and I can foresee horrible issues with software raid lol. If you are lucky all it will do is slow down your pc. It might also be to the point where if you ever need to format your c drive then those discs are useless until they are formatted too. I don't claim to know anything about software raid... but it just sounds like a REALLY bad idea to me. | ||||
|
Alexvrb | Aug 14, 2003 | ||
| Software RAID with win2k is junk. You can't install windows on the array, you would HAVE to use that 40GB as your C drive. That is kind of lame in itself. If you plan on using it as a server, do you really need the added speed (which actually isn't tremendous) of RAID 5? Why not just use RAID 1? Either way, it'd be much better if you just bought a RAID card, especially with such an expensive investment. Your CPU is going to end up doing what a RAID card does. IDE HDDs use up enough CPU cycles as it is, let alone with soft RAID 5. | ||||
|
racketboy | Aug 14, 2003 | ||
|
I think Best Buy has a very nice sale/rebate on this drive this week. $60 or $70 I think | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 15, 2003 | ||
|
@$@$#@$@# I bought the wrong cables (the mold made me), I'll probably just have to use regular cables instead. !#@!#!@#!@#! Other then that everything else seems good. I'm formatting the main drive, I'll keep you guys posted on how my machine is performance-wise once it's built. I have a feeling it'll be great (not that it was bad before). | ||||
|
Alexvrb | Aug 15, 2003 | ||
| If you're just using that RAID 5 array as a storage dump you shouldn't see problems. But to me, the whole point of RAID is to increase the performance of my main drive (whether using redundancy or not, depends on number of drives), the one that I boot off, the one I have Windows and all my programs on. Being forced to boot off a seperate drive because you're using software RAID strikes me as silly. But if it saves you a whopping 40-50 bucks, sure. Why not. | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 16, 2003 | ||
|
Bah I'm going to just stop arguing. :cheers | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 17, 2003 | ||
|
Progress report #1: 1) Installed the drives, set the 80 gig drive as boot. - Primary IDE - 80 gig - new burner I got - Secondary - 120 gig - IDE PCI Card - Primary - 120 gig - Secondary - 120 gig 2) Installed Win 2k Server. - Install seemed marginally faster. 3) Raided through software 4) Gasped in horror as my CPU went to 90% usuage when I started formatting the drives and it started "regenerating" Progress report #2: 1) Swapped the position of the drives, set the 80 gig drive as boot. - Primary IDE - 80 gig - new burner I got - Secondary - empty (I'll probably move the burner here) - IDE PCI Card - Primary - 120 gig - Secondary - 120 gig - 120 gig 2) Watched CPU usage go up to a reasonable 30% during regeneration. It's only 10% through the regeneration process, I'll let you know how it is in the end. I am worried about heat though, any advice? The drives are physically hot to touch, never seen that in a hard drive before. I'm guessing I should throw another fan in there? | ||||
|
racketboy | Aug 17, 2003 | ||
|
probably how close together are the drives. giving them room to breathe will help | ||||
|
slinga | Aug 17, 2003 | ||
| There pretty close together, I'm not sure how to mount them securely and have leave breathing room. I guess I could buy another drive mount. | ||||
|
Alexvrb | Aug 17, 2003 | ||
| Another drive mount would work. Otherwise just have enough airflow in your case. I mean, they are going to run somewhat hot regardless, and are designed to do so, you just have to keep them from frying each other. Also, your RAID array would probably run better if each drive had its own channel, but that would require another channel, so I guess that won't happen. You'll defintely want to put the burner on the secondary IDE on your mainboard, having it on the same channel as your C drive can cause performance issues. | ||||
 |
Curtis | Aug 17, 2003 | ||
Got any spare 5 1/4 drive bays? Why not sandwitch and suspend... your extra drives?  | ||||
|
Alexvrb | Aug 17, 2003 | ||
| I think that's probably overkill. Sandwiching alone isn't so bad, but suspending the drive as well? Heh... | ||||
| 1 | 2 | Next> |