Originally Posted by S_V™;11980401
Raid Controller is just assigning the job.. It's not really bottleneck. If that is the case ,RAID 0 should also be slow.. Writing same files in different devices would naturally takes time than writing once at same time...
That doesnt make sense. They are the same type of drive, the file will write to each drive at the same speed. If you are using different drives it will be hindered by the slowest drive. There's alot of variables with RAID setups and controllers.
IEATFISH if you just want to copy over the data and not mirror the OS+apps too. I'd check into SyncToy
We use it at the office to back up critical systems. Example, my boss set it up to backup his work data to his external Raid 1. He loves it.
Originally Posted by OC96junkie;11980578
I'm gonna go out on a limb and say this is user error. I use SyncBack at work and at home and really, its a professional grade tool. I've set it up hundreds of times and never have I had the issue you speak of.. If you want to use software mirroring, IMO SyncBack is the most robust and resource-less (using less resource) tool I have found to date.
On another note, the only option I like would be RAID 1 or RAID 5 (depending on how many drives at your disposal)
RAID 1 and 5 are basically as other said, redundant drives. One fails, hot swap it and the RAID controller rebuilds the array and you're 100% again.
You may want to point out that performance is way down when the array is rebuilding (as in a replaced drive). Its still better than data loss.
is also a good read if you wanna kill some time.Edited by SniperXX - 1/12/11 at 12:09am