Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › Raid 01 vs 10 (4 HDDs)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Raid 01 vs 10 (4 HDDs)

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
I get the differerence between the two. But in a 4 storage device situation, is there rlly any difference betweent the two RAIDs? My thought would be RAID 10 would better performance wise since ur in the end running a RAID 0, but i have minimal knowledge/experience, and wouldnt mind some words of wisdom from ppl who actually know what they are talking about
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
post #2 of 11
From what little I know about RAID and from what my friends who have personal severs have set up for themselves, Raid 5 or Raid 6 is the way to go if you have 4+ drives. The Wiki on raid has a lot of useful information, I suggest checking it out while you wait for a guru to help you out with stripe size and etc.


Do you have a raid card or are you using integrated? I'm not sure how P67 handles raid, but it's highly rated with SSD Raid 0's.

~subbed
Boiled In Water
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthII x4 630 @ 3.6/2.7ghz 1.4v Gigabyte 890GPA-UD3H rev1.0 Gigabyte GTX 550 ti 1gb 1000/2000/2400 G.Skill DDR3 1600mhz 2x2gb 1.5v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x1TB RAID0 WDFALS+Seagate LG DVD+RW Lightscribe Windows 7 Ultimate x64 21.5" Asus 5ms 1080p 
PowerCase
Corsair CMPSU-850TX Antec 300 
  hide details  
Reply
Boiled In Water
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthII x4 630 @ 3.6/2.7ghz 1.4v Gigabyte 890GPA-UD3H rev1.0 Gigabyte GTX 550 ti 1gb 1000/2000/2400 G.Skill DDR3 1600mhz 2x2gb 1.5v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x1TB RAID0 WDFALS+Seagate LG DVD+RW Lightscribe Windows 7 Ultimate x64 21.5" Asus 5ms 1080p 
PowerCase
Corsair CMPSU-850TX Antec 300 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by johonm333 View Post
From what little I know about RAID and from what my friends who have personal severs have set up for themselves, Raid 5 or Raid 6 is the way to go if you have 4+ drives. The Wiki on raid has a lot of useful information, I suggest checking it out while you wait for a guru to help you out with stripe size and etc.


Do you have a raid card or are you using integrated? I'm not sure how P67 handles raid, but it's highly rated with SSD Raid 0's.

~subbed
isnt there a performance drop with RAID 5/6, even with a dedicate RAID controller? Unless i was purely focussed on multiple back ups(i.e. a server), i wouldnt touch RAID 5/6.

Regardless, still just wondering what the difference is between RAID 01 and 10 with 4 storage devices
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
post #4 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaXxJaPxX View Post
I get the differerence between the two. But in a 4 storage device situation, is there rlly any difference betweent the two RAIDs? My thought would be RAID 10 would better performance wise since ur in the end running a RAID 0, but i have minimal knowledge/experience, and wouldnt mind some words of wisdom from ppl who actually know what they are talking about
The performance between RAID10 and RAID0+1 is virtually the same.


If a single disk in a RAID10 fails, it becomes almost a RAID1.... It can substain another disk failure if the disk is part of the other stripe.

If a single disk in a RAID0+1 fails, it becomes basically a RAID0.... It cannot substain another disk failure.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DaXxJaPxX View Post
isnt there a performance drop with RAID 5/6, even with a dedicate RAID controller? Unless i was purely focussed on multiple back ups(i.e. a server), i wouldnt touch RAID 5/6.

Regardless, still just wondering what the difference is between RAID 01 and 10 with 4 storage devices
RAID5/6 take a hit on random access and writes since there is overhead for the parity calculations.

For file storage use (write once, read many), RAID5/6 is great. A 4 disk RAID5 provides the storage of 3 disks and sequential read performance close to that of 3xRAID0.

A 4 disk RAID6 is provides the storage of 2 disks and sequential read performance close to that of 2xRAID0. The benefit of RAID6 over RAID10/0+1 is that it can always substain two disk failures.
Edited by DuckieHo - 6/2/11 at 11:03am
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #5 of 11
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the explanation, clears up a lot of question i had.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post
The performance between RAID10 and RAID0+1 is virtually the same.

.
Still got a question on the 0+1 vs 10 though I guess my problem lies in my comprehension as to how RAID 0+1/10 reads and writes possibly. I would think that in RAID10, since ur essentially reading and writing like a RAID0, you'd get the performance increase. And you also now have the added protection of having 2 RAID1 setups if there was a failure. And then in RAID 0+1, ur reading as if it were a RAID 1, which would be slower(than RAID0), and now have the increased risk of failure that comes along with RAID 0 if an additional disc fails. Please point out any inaccuracies, just here to learn
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post
The performance between RAID10 and RAID0+1 is virtually the same.


If a single disk in a RAID10 fails, it becomes almost a RAID1.... It can substain another disk failure if the disk is part of the other stripe.

If a single disk in a RAID0+1 fails, it becomes basically a RAID0.... It cannot substain another disk failure.




RAID5/6 take a hit on random access and writes since there is overhead for the parity calculations.

For file storage use (write once, read many), RAID5/6 is great. A 4 disk RAID5 provides the storage of 3 disks and sequential read performance close to that of 3xRAID0.

A 4 disk RAID6 is provides the storage of 2 disks and sequential read performance close to that of 2xRAID0. The benefit of RAID6 over RAID10/0+1 is that it can always substain two disk failures.
Beautifully put... this is it.
Mini Dragon
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon E3-1230 V2 ASRock H77M-ITX LGA 1155 Intel H77 GIGABYTE 680  CORSAIR Vengeance LP 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
MZ-7TD500BW Samsung 840  white laser ... corsair H90 Windows 7 Pro 
MonitorMonitorMonitorMonitor
Qnix QX2700 Asus VS247H-P Asus VS247H-P Asus VS247H-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky MK Green LED Full Board Silverstone Tek Strider Series ATX12V/EPS12V 55... Fractal Node 304 Logitech G9 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
X Trak M-AUDIO BX5 G930 
  hide details  
Reply
Mini Dragon
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon E3-1230 V2 ASRock H77M-ITX LGA 1155 Intel H77 GIGABYTE 680  CORSAIR Vengeance LP 16GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
MZ-7TD500BW Samsung 840  white laser ... corsair H90 Windows 7 Pro 
MonitorMonitorMonitorMonitor
Qnix QX2700 Asus VS247H-P Asus VS247H-P Asus VS247H-P 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Ducky MK Green LED Full Board Silverstone Tek Strider Series ATX12V/EPS12V 55... Fractal Node 304 Logitech G9 
Mouse PadAudioAudio
X Trak M-AUDIO BX5 G930 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jackeduphard View Post
Beautifully put... this is it.
agree, itd rep the moderator if i could lol.

Another question though, you said if the RAID0+1 has a disc failure, it cannot sustain another one. Thats only true if the 2nd drive down is either the 2nd half of the single array or the drive in the other array with the identical data correct? Basically a 1/3 shot of staying above water if a second disc goes down
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
Rising Sun
(19 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
|i5 2500k 4.8ghz @1.335v| |Asrock Fatal1ty P67 Professional| |XFX 6990| |XFX 6950 unlocked to 6970| 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveOptical Drive
|Samsung DDR3 4x4GB 2133 10-10-10-28-1t| |Crucial 64GB M4 SSD x 2| |Samsung 830 128GB| |Lite-On 4x Blu Ray| 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
|Koolance CPU 370| |Koolance VID-AR699| |Koolance VID-AR697| |Win 7 64bit Pro| 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
|U2711| |2x KBC Pokers MX Red| |Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold 1200w| |NZXT Phantom 820| 
MouseMouse PadAudio
|Mionix Naos 5000| |Artisan Hien M Hard Red| |X-Fi Fatal1ty Titanium| 
  hide details  
Reply
post #8 of 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaXxJaPxX View Post
Still got a question on the 0+1 vs 10 though I guess my problem lies in my comprehension as to how RAID 0+1/10 reads and writes possibly. I would think that in RAID10, since ur essentially reading and writing like a RAID0, you'd get the performance increase. And you also now have the added protection of having 2 RAID1 setups if there was a failure. And then in RAID 0+1, ur reading as if it were a RAID 1, which would be slower(than RAID0), and now have the increased risk of failure that comes along with RAID 0 if an additional disc fails. Please point out any inaccuracies, just here to learn
Both RAID10 and RAID0+1 provide a performance increase close to that of RAID0. RAID10 is RAID0 then RAID1. RAID0+1 is RAID0 then RAID1. For a write, you still have to hit two drives. The read/writes requests are still being sent to two disks at once.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaXxJaPxX View Post
agree, itd rep the moderator if i could lol.

Another question though, you said if the RAID0+1 has a disc failure, it cannot sustain another one. Thats only true if the 2nd drive down is either the 2nd half of the single array or the drive in the other array with the identical data correct? Basically a 1/3 shot of staying above water if a second disc goes down
When one disk die in RAID0+1, it basically becomes a RAID0. Any other disk fails and the stripe is broken.

When one disk die in RAID10, you are left with a RAID1 being striped with a single disk. If this single disk fails, the stripe is broken. If one of the RAID1 disks fails, then you end up with two disks striped together still.
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 11
Thank you very much DuckieHo! OCN needs more people like you!
Boiled In Water
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthII x4 630 @ 3.6/2.7ghz 1.4v Gigabyte 890GPA-UD3H rev1.0 Gigabyte GTX 550 ti 1gb 1000/2000/2400 G.Skill DDR3 1600mhz 2x2gb 1.5v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x1TB RAID0 WDFALS+Seagate LG DVD+RW Lightscribe Windows 7 Ultimate x64 21.5" Asus 5ms 1080p 
PowerCase
Corsair CMPSU-850TX Antec 300 
  hide details  
Reply
Boiled In Water
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AthII x4 630 @ 3.6/2.7ghz 1.4v Gigabyte 890GPA-UD3H rev1.0 Gigabyte GTX 550 ti 1gb 1000/2000/2400 G.Skill DDR3 1600mhz 2x2gb 1.5v 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x1TB RAID0 WDFALS+Seagate LG DVD+RW Lightscribe Windows 7 Ultimate x64 21.5" Asus 5ms 1080p 
PowerCase
Corsair CMPSU-850TX Antec 300 
  hide details  
Reply
post #10 of 11
What Duckie said - pretty much identical performance plus more resilience with RAID10 over RAID0+1.

But there is also another important reason to go with 10 - rebuilds. An array rebuild on RAID10 only needs to sync up the single new drive from its mirror pair. However a rebuild on RAID0+1 must resync half of the disks (the entire RAID0 array needs to be mirrored, as the entire RAID0 array failed previously, unlike in RAID10 where only a single disk mirror failed). This takes a minimum of twice as long, but could be much more than this (an 8-drive RADI0+1 array would take 4 times longer to rebuild than an equivalent RAID10).

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaXxJaPxX View Post
isnt there a performance drop with RAID 5/6, even with a dedicate RAID controller? Unless i was purely focussed on multiple back ups(i.e. a server), i wouldnt touch RAID 5/6.
Depends on what you're doing with your array - for an equivalent number of spindles RAID5/6 can significantly outperform RAID10 as there are more active drives. The only real performance hit that RAID5/6 takes is when small random writes are performed, as this is when there is significant increases in the number of I/O operations required due to the parity data.

The parity calculation is usually the easy bit as modern CPUs and XOR processors are so powerful. The performance hit comes largely from the additional reads and writes that are needed to update the parity.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hard Drives & Storage
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Hard Drives & Storage › Raid 01 vs 10 (4 HDDs)