raid question

Massive Attack · 22 Oct 2007 at 21:57

hi guys, going to be setting up a raid 0 array with 2 x 320gb seagate 7200.10s and i was just wondering if i can set the volume to say 100gb and then have the rest on each drive non raid for storage if u see what i mean

dbmzk1 · 22 Oct 2007 at 23:42

I don't think you can, but even if you could why not just raid it all :confused:

semi-pro waster · 23 Oct 2007 at 00:21

Nope, not that I know of. Raid (and in particular perhaps Raid0) is an all or nothing solution. You would have to combine both drives to create the 640gb array and then partition it but you still need both drives to continue working as one for each logical drive to be ok.

As dbmzk1 says, why would you want to do this?

Massive Attack · 23 Oct 2007 at 12:51

ahh ok guys, was going to put the OS on a 100gb partition and other data which i dont want to loose on the rest if i raid it all i could loose all the data, im not bothered about loosing the os as i can just re format thanks anyway

Imy · 23 Oct 2007 at 13:01

You can do it on the RAID controller I have*. You setup a raid 'set' using as many drives as you like, then create as many raid volumes on it as you like, each using a different RAID type if you want.

* but it did cost £474+vat

rpstewart · 23 Oct 2007 at 15:00

Massive Attack said:
hi guys, going to be setting up a raid 0 array with 2 x 320gb seagate 7200.10s and i was just wondering if i can set the volume to say 100gb and then have the rest on each drive non raid for storage if u see what i mean

With the Intel Matrix RAID controllers you can have parts of each drive in different arrays so in theory you could have a 100Gb RAID0 array using the first 50Gb of each drive and then have 2 x 270Gb storage partitions.

Personally I'd just RAID0 the whole lot and partition it at that level, having the separate storage partitions may actually reduce the performance of the RAID0 array becuase the heads can easily get out of sync with each other hence delaying access to the RAIDed data. You should be backing up the storage drives anyway so there's no reason not to have that space as part of the array.