RAID 0 Improvement- I've never had an array fail with modern HDD's

Hi folks

I've been using a server for a few years now running 24/7 (OS on SSD and data on a RAID 0 arrary of 4 X 5 TB HDD's) -- I know if I get a fail I lose the whole array but a lot of data is multi-media etc which isn't changed a lot and I have backups. I also run VM's (performance is much faster in this way) and PC backups from Lan plus file shares (media streaming etc).

I read all these things about saying don't use RAID 0 - use RAID 10 -- but the performance is much better with RAID 0 and these days decent HDD's are reliable --and in any case if you have backup it's easy to re-build the array.

If you use RAID 10 you do get some improvement - not as great as pure RAID 0 though but of course you reduce the data volume size due to the amount set aside for mirroring / striping so recovery is possible with the loss of up to half the array.

I tested also with 2 arrays of 2 X 5TB each but the 4 X 5 TB array was far better. (Note if you do this type of thing on a Linux / NAS server the HDD's can be all different sizes too so a good way of using old HDD's as well.

As always with these things --Risk to reward ratio !! but if you have backups then to me the speed / performance advantage of RAID 0 is well worth it - the convienience of having a massive data store staves all the problems of HDD's getting full / moving stuff around / organising volumes etc.

Keep the OS on an SSD and it's really fine. Pesonally given the reliability of HDD's these days then there isn't a problem in using RAID 0. A lot of people on these boards have RAID cards or use Software RAID on NAS type systems -- it's worth looking at RAID 0 if you need more space / performance but ensure you have backups.

Most people aren't running military grade systems which require mission critical availability at all times and the falure these days of HDD's - even consumer grade ones is grossly overdone.

When large volume cheap SSD's are available the improvement will be even more dramatic !!!! especially file sharing / multi-media sharing lwhen a few users on LAN.

Cheers
jimbo

Go with what is best for you.

BUT, I have a server that has 2 x 1TB in a RAID1 array. Came in one day with a yellow light and one disk on the array had failed. Pulled it out (yep the machine still kept running with no downtime) and checked it. Under Win10 there appeared to be no errors so cleared the data and stuck it back in the server which rebuilt the array all good.
4 weeks later same thing happened. Seems the server did not the WD black drives so I got specific Lenovo 1.2TB drives. Just had to stick one in, let it rebuild, then stuck the other in and another rebuild.
There was a lot of data on these as it was running as a security camera server and no data loss, no having to have the system down while restoring data.

For me a server will always have RAID > 0. For a desktop machine that does not need to be up all the time RAID0 is okay if you need the space.

jimbo45 said:

I tested also with 2 arrays of 2 X 5TB each but the 4 X 5 TB array was far better. (Note if you do this type of thing on a Linux / NAS server the HDD's can be all different sizes too so a good way of using old HDD's as well

That is the thing with HDDs - generally the more disks you have the better - and more smaller disks is better than a few big ones.

If you have 2 big drives the arms will be flailing around - if you have 200 small drives your speed will be vastly better.