Proper Hard Disk Configuration

I'll soon be ordering a new Mac Pro as a Final Cut Studio workstation and I'd like to know if there is a "proper" or recommended way to spread the workflow across multiple hard drives for optimal performance. I've done some searching in various forums for advice in this regard but it seems that there are as many different setups as there are video editors.
The price for the 1T hard drive seems reasonable so I'll likely fill all four slots. I understand that solid state drives would be better but their price is unreasonable for the revenue my company generates.
Here's what I'm thinking, and please tell me where I'm right or wrong.
1st drive - OS, FCS apps and project files.
2nd drive - FCS content (templates, audio files, etc), imported media, imported footage.
3rd drive - scratch disk
4th drive - final renders
The system I'm planning on is 8 core, 16GB RAM. Two final questions I have is whether the performance of Final Cut and Motion would be improved by upgrading the graphics card to the 5870 or is the bottleneck elsewhere, and is 16GB RAM the right amount?

I would put captured material on the second RAID and Projects/Scratch/Preview on the third.
It seems like overkill to have the third RAID0 though. I would be inclined to set up the 5th and 6th disks as separate and put projects/scratch on one, and use the 6th as backup for the 5th. Not as a RAID1 because that would slow things down. Just a separate backup.

Similar Messages

Hard Disk Configuration

I've just finished building my new machine and am after a bit of adivce on the hard disk configuration, i've had some feedback from Jim Simon on another post, but wanted to check what the best set-up would be.
The current set-up is as follows:
1 x 500Gb Raid 0 Array - Windows Programs etc
1 x 1Tb Raid 0 Array - Currently empty
1 x 1Tb Raid 0 Array - Also currently blank
I have in total 6 Disks, 4 x 500Gb SATA drives and 2 x 250Gb SATA Drievs, the MB i'm using supports RAID in 0 / 1 / 5 / 0+1 / JBOD
Thanks in advance.

I would put captured material on the second RAID and Projects/Scratch/Preview on the third.
It seems like overkill to have the third RAID0 though. I would be inclined to set up the 5th and 6th disks as separate and put projects/scratch on one, and use the 6th as backup for the 5th. Not as a RAID1 because that would slow things down. Just a separate backup.

Need advice on second hard disk configuration/moving folders/...

Hello everyone!
I just bought a second internal 250gig hard disk, because my first one was getting full.
As far as I heard it is advised to keep the Logic program and the OS on one disk, and to do all recordings and save all projects on a second disk. Am I correct so far?
Now, of course all my previous projects are located on the same disk as my OS and Logic Program.
How do I safely move all projects (and their soundfiles) to my second disk? Can I just move the folders to the new disk and will all projects work? Or are there special procedures to be made? I would hate to do things which cause all projects to be scrambled and unusable.
Please give as much 'step by step' explanations as possible...
And if you have any other remarks or tips, I'd be glad to hear about them!
I am aware that for my future recordings I will have to change the record path in Logic to my new second drive, so no need to write about that...
Cheers!

If they are indeed saved as 'projects', just move the folders where you want them.
It is that easy.

What is the best Hard Disk Configuration?

Hi all!
I've been reading the forum for some time, and now I decided to build my new PC for editing.
I will use it with Premiere and After Effects CS5.
The hardware I am going to buy is listed below:
- Processor Intel Core i7-2600K
- Mother Board ASUS SABERTOOTH P67 (or the ASUS P8P67 Deluxe... I didn't decide it yet)
- 2 Hard Disks WD Caviar Black 1TB SATA III (6Gb/s) 7200RPM [for working media and exports]
- 1 Hard Disk Seagate Barracuda 500GB SATA II (3Gb/s) 7200RPM [for OS and Programs]
- SDRAM DDR3 Corsair 8GB (2 x 4GB) 1866MHz (PC3 15000)
- Video card ATI Radeon 5850 1024MB (later I'll buy another and CrossFire them)
- Pioneer Internal Blu-ray Disc/DVD/CD Writer BDR-206
I also have a eSata Docking Station and other slower HDDs for Backups and "Old Projects Library".
So, my question is simple: what is the best way to use my HDDs, to get the best performance on Premiere and After Effects?
A) OS, Programs, PageFile and Media Cache on the Seagate HDD + Media, Projects, Previews and Exports on the WD HDDs working on RAID0; or
B) OS, Programs and PageFile on the Seagate HDD + Media and Projects on one WD HDD + Previews, Media Cache and Exports on the second WD HDD?
Thanks a lot!
Thiago
Ps.: My next upgrade will be another 8GB for RAM and another 2 WD Caviar Black HDDs, as soon as I make some money with that machine... xD

Hey Harm, thanks for the response.
First of all, I did choose the ATI GPU because of the benchmarks I saw on internet, BUT i didn't know about the CUDA Acceleration Technology. So, I will probably buy a nVidia GTX460, since it is at the same price level, but seems to have a better performance with Premiere and AfterEffects. =)
But the question is about HDDs, so let's get to it.
I read in the forum that it doesn't make a big difference to have RAID 0 HDDs or even use the SATA III drives foe video editing, because the system doesn't even use the whole bandwith of the SATA II technology.
But, in another question, I read that it depends on the type of files you are working with. I have a Canon 550D, so it records in 330MB/min (about 45MB/s) in 1080/24p, using the h.264 codec (in *.mov files). Those are the files I will edit and I want to burn Blu-Ray disks with my movies.
That said, my doubts are:
A) Should I invest on SATA III disks for better performance? Will I take any advantage of the 6Gb/s bandwidth, or the only difference will be the 64MB cache?
B) Is it better to have a faster C: drive?
I am asking that to get a better use of my investment. If the SATA III disks won't give me any difference on performance, I could get some SATA II disks and then use that money to buy more RAM - or faster RAM, like 2000MHz.
Thanks again!!!
Thiago

Unattended.xml disk configuration

Hello Technet,
I am looking for a Unattended.xml hard disk configuration that removes the partitions that already exist, and create 1 new partition for the Windows installation.
I am sure that this is a frequently asked question.. but I cant find a solution for this.
The program that I am using for making a unattended Windows 7 professional is Windows RT7Lite. I would like to make 1 .iso file for installing Windows 7, with updates etc. included in the iso.
Thanks
Thanks, greetings Maurice

I do not know how RT7Lite works other than the project is pretty much in limbo or dead. Here is the XML needed to format the drive and create a single partition to span the entire disk.
<DiskConfiguration>
<Disk wcm:action="add">
<ModifyPartitions>
<ModifyPartition wcm:action="add">
<Active>true</Active>
<Extend>true</Extend>
<Format>NTFS</Format>
<Label>System</Label>
<Letter>C</Letter>
<Order>1</Order>
<PartitionID>1</PartitionID>
</ModifyPartition>
</ModifyPartitions>
<DiskID>0</DiskID>
<WillWipeDisk>true</WillWipeDisk>
<CreatePartitions>
<CreatePartition wcm:action="add">
<Order>1</Order>
<Size>20480</Size>
<Extend>false</Extend>
<Type>Primary</Type>
</CreatePartition>
</CreatePartitions>
</Disk>
<WillShowUI>OnError</WillShowUI>
</DiskConfiguration>

Windows 8.1 Hyper-V - Error while configuring the hard disk 0xC03A0014

Hello. I have just enabled Hyper-V on my Windows 8.1 laptop.
Dell Latitude E7440 i7-4600U @ 2.10GHz
I can create a Virtual-Switch but I am unable to create a new Hard Disk or Virtual Machine within Hyper-V. I get the same error for both processes.
Error: The Virtual Machine Management Service encountered an error while configuring the hard disk on virtual machine New Virtual Machine.
Failed to create the virtual hard disk.
The system failed to create C:\Users\user\Documents\Test\New.vhdx .
Failed to create the virtual hard disk
The system failed to create C:\Users\user\Documents\Test\New.vhdx . A Virtual disk support provider for the specified file was not found. (0xC03A0014).
I have ran all Dell Client System updates and all of windows updates.
I have attempted to create a virtual machine on the current SSD and also an external drive. The same error appears.
I have also attempted to create a virtual hard disk via Hyper-v with a Base vhdx, still the same error occurs. I've tested the base image on other laptops of the same model and windows 8.1 without issue.
Any thoughts on how I can fix this?
Thank you,
-Jake

Hi Jake,
"Enable Data Execution Protection (DEP) in the BIOS and make sure the Format of drive file system is not fat32.
1. Uninstall Intel Active System Monitor 3.0, if installed.
2. Disable "Intel IPMI Service" and "Intel Monitoring Agent" Service.
3. Open regedit and locate: HKLM\System\CurrentControlSet\Services\imbdrv.
4. Change the Start Key to 4 (Disabled).
5. Locate HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Class\{4D36E97D-E325-11CE-BFC1-0 8002BE10318}.
6. Take ownership of the ‘Properties’ key.
7. Give yourself full permission for this key.
8. Now locate the properties key; if you see a ‘Security’ entry there, that is your problem. Delete this key.
9. Try attaching or adding the VHD again after rebooting.
If above steps did not help, add the Network Service account to Local Administrator group."
It is quoted from the similar thread below :
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/windows/en-US/55085ff3-0f26-41bd-b590-bb3490e2d6f5/win-7-professional-a-virtual-disk-support-provider-for-the-specified-file-was-not-found?forum=w7itprovirt
Hope it helps
Best Regards
Elton Ji
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

I need to configure a new hard disk as backup disk for time machine. The set up program is running and it says it will take 9 days to backup about 56 GB. Is it normal ?

I need to configure a new hard disk as backup disk for time machine.
The set up program is running since two hours and it says it will take 9 days to backup about 56 GB.
Is it normal ?

Roberto 17 wrote:
I started this morning at 12 and after 5 hours now the backup is about 6 GB up on 56 GB.
The new HD is a WD My Passport Edge 500 GB capacity
5 hours to do 6 GB of transfer is NOT normal, even for USB 2.0 so there's something wrong here. I'd say cancel it, wipe the drive and then test the integrity of the drive. Do some file transfers over to and see if it's behaving normally. It could be a bad USB cable, it could be a bad drive or bad enclosure. As it's new, I suspect you haven't really put it through its paces yet and it's important to do that first before commissioning it to serve as your "reliable backup."

I have a PC and a need help to configure my external hard disk on my network. Thanks

I have a PC and a need help to configure my external hard disk on my network. Thanks

If you mean you wish to plug a USB drive into the Airport Extreme router (or TC not express) that is easy..
The disk must be formatted FAT32.. as if.. stay away from FAT .. or HFS+ ie Mac OS extended Journaled.
Format the disk on a Mac is best.. and even use GUID partition scheme not MBR.
The PC has no issue writing and reading files because this is a network drive.. The PC does not write to the drive.. it writes files to the Airport OS which writes and reads the disk and passes the info using standard windows SMB.. To the windows computer it will be a Windows NT server.. FAT32 setup.
If your setup is different.. to my hugely guessed assumptions.. give details.. always helps to have.. make and model.
Make and model of disk.. make and model of router.. how the setup will be done.. what windows OS you run.. etc etc.
As it stands your question could have nothing to do with apple at all.. other than you posted in a forum so I guess there is something apple in there somewhere.

SCVMM 2012 RC - Unable to remove a VHD in the library because it has a dependency (Virtual Hard Disk deployment configuration)

When attempting to delete a VHD in the library, I am getting the below error message. Any thoughts on where I might look for the dependency "Virtual Hard Disk deployment configuration"?
Exact error message:
The library object (os_disk) cannot be removed because following objects are dependent on it:
Virtual Hard Disk deployment configuration
Please ensure that no objects are dependent on this library object and try the operation again.
ID: 848

On the final version (tested in 2012 SP1)
Suggest this instead of hacking around in the database:
You will receive a message that objects are dependent on the library object. Note the name that is listed after "VM Template"
Go to powershell in scvmm
Run:
remove-scvmtemplate -vmtemplate "NAME_YOU_RECORDED_FROM_ERROR"
Then, you can delete the template from SCVMM,
Wow Microsoft, Wow.

New Virtual Machine Wizard error: The server encountered an error while configuring hard disk on SEPmW8

on a backup DNS w2008 R2 server I tried create a new VM.
[Window Title]
New Virtual Machine Wizard
[Main Instruction]
The server encountered an error while configuring hard disk on SEPmW8.
[Content]
You might not have permission to perform this task.
[Close]
when I tried creating v a new Vhd using default or custom folder, I get
[Window Title]
New Virtual Hard Disk Wizard
[Main Instruction]
The server encountered an error trying to create the virtual hard disk.
[Content]
You might not have permission to perform this task.
[Close]
But I verified the admin ID does have full access to the folders. furthermore it belongs administrators, domain Admins, enterprise admins,
What gives? what additional privilege I need to give to the login ID, I tried in vain adding to Virtual machines but got rejected. I also could not locate anything like virtual machines in the active directory,
Btw I finally managed to create a new VM wi/ VHD but still can't create new vhd
------------Platform info ---
the physical quad core Xenon server for backup dns also works as exchange server
has 12 GB RAM, 931 GB Raid 5 storage with 325 GB free.

These actions are not performed in the security context of the user. The Local System / computer account of the Hyper-V Server is what needs the access, not the user.
Also, many AV products will cause these problems if the exclusions are not set properly, as they block the hypervisor from doing its job.
Brian Ehlert
http://ITProctology.blogspot.com
Learn. Apply. Repeat.

How to see my IPAD hardware configuration ( Like Hard disk drive , processor and camera pixels )

How to see my IPAD hardware configuration ( Like Hard disk drive , processor and camera pixels )

Yeah. It is called System Status.
Check out this application on the App Store:
System Status - device activity monitor (battery level, disk usage, file stats, CPU load, network details, memory info, process list, work time, charge monitoring, connection overview, routing table, os data, hw report, console log, netstat information)
Techet
Category: Utilities
Updated: Oct 27, 2011
687 Ratings
iTunes for Mac and Windows
Please note that you have not been added to any email lists.
Copyright © 2012 Apple Inc. All rights reserved
Sent from my iPad

Oracle recommend configuring a Sun StorageTek 6140 with 15 hard disks

Hi,
How would Oracle recommend configuring a Sun StorageTek 6140 with 15 hard disks for optimal use with multiple Solaris servers running Oracle instances connected via a SAN? Should the storage array be configured as a single RAID 5 device and then LUNs created for the different servers? Or should each Oracle instance have its own dedicated hard disks?
Also might we see better performance if we used Solid State Devices for the ZFS Intent Log (ZIL) and/or L2ARC on ZFS, instead of using the UFS file system straight to the SAN?
Regards
NM

I don't think Oracle would recommended any particular way. I would consider the following, but your mileage may vary, so testing is very important.
Raid 1 (10) for logs
RAID5 for Tables
But if you have many servers access the same LUN's/VDISKS then contention may be a problem. Maybe consider consolidating all you servers to a single Oracle Server.( For protection a second server with Oracle Solaris Cluster)
ASM is the best method for managing disks and data placement. But if like to see files/directories then go for UFS with direct I/O enabled. ZFS is fantastic if you want to use Snapshot/clones/Compression, etc.. but I think UFS is faster.
As for cache, Oracle 11gR2 has support for storing objects specifically in FLASH, so look to use the Sun F20 card with 96Gb of flash.
HTH
Andy

Hard disk installation and configuring?

What is step by step procedure for installing 2nd hard disk into x86 box?
What are the files to be edited? This was interview question by Sun .pls help.

I think we have to install veridata server software on a separate server other than source and target and the agents should be installed on source and target.
Yes & Yes.
And also after installation how we can compare source and target database.
Note 1307285.1 and http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E15881_01/doc.104/gg_veridata_admin.pdf should guide you.

How to delete files from external ntfs hard disk [Solved]

Hi guys
first, sorry for my bad English.
I have an external hard disk ( WD 500GB ) with ntfs file system and i have installed ntfs-3g package.
3 days ago, when i wanted to delete some files, i get a problem with it,
look the output :
[jahangir@Arch New Metal]$ sudo rm *
[sudo] password for jahangir:
rm: cannot remove '02 - Korn - Love and Meth.mp3': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove '30Seconds To Mars': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove '30Seconds To Mars 1': Is a directory
rm: cannot remove 'Avantasia': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Avantasia 1': Is a directory
rm: cannot remove 'Avantasia 2': Is a directory
rm: cannot remove 'Behemoth': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Behemoth 1': Is a directory
rm: cannot remove 'Hanging Garden - At Every Door - 2013': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Hanging Garden - At Every Door - 2014': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Rosetta': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Rosetta 1': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Sepultura': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Sepultura 1': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Slipknot': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Slipknot 1': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Tokio Hotel': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'Tokio Hotel 1': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'T\303\275r': No such file or directory
rm: cannot remove 'neww': No such file or directory
[jahangir@Arch New Metal]$
Who can help me ?
I wanted to delete .trash-1000 file from my main directory hard dist and i confront with this error :
[jahangir@Arch My Passport]$ sudo rm .Trash-1000
[sudo] password for jahangir:
rm: cannot remove '.Trash-1000': No such file or directory
[jahangir@Arch My Passport]$
In the event that it is there.
also in main directory of my hard disk i have 1 mp3 file that i can't view it in file manager and it will be displayed in Windows OS and with ls command in terminal :
[jahangir@Arch My Passport]$ ls
ls: cannot access 01 - Lost.mp3: No such file or directory
ls: cannot access 02 - Surrendered To The Decadence.mp3: No such file or directory
01 - Lost.mp3 In The Name Of God Videos ZzZ - IMAN winold
02 - Surrendered To The Decadence.mp3 New Metal World of Warcraft Cataclysm 4.3.4 enGB navid wow wrath
[jahangir@Arch My Passport]$
what is this file and how can i delete .Trash-1000 and this files and content of "New Metal" directory ?
Last edited by jiros (2013-12-23 20:57:05)

I believe you used ntfs for a reason. As far as I know, Windows isn't friendly with hdd filesystems others than fat or ntfs, so once you format your external harddrive to ext4, windows won't talk to it at all, unless you install some additional driver or software.
You have several possibilities to do:
1) You could use FAT32, it's kind of a dumb filesystem, linux, mac and windows can read and write to it, there are some limitations like file permisions or 4GB file size limit.
2) You could make multiple partitions on your external harddrive, one with ntfs (for windows) and the other with some fs that is support natively in Linux and Mac, I believe only option would be HFS+. I'm not an expert, maybe somebody will correct me. Anyway, if you aren't going to connect your disk to Mac, than ext4 would be a good choice. But this approach with two different partions is kind of dumb, because usually you need the same data available on whatever platform.
3) If I were you, I would continue using NTFS or FAT32. It's not ideal, but it's a price you have to pay for dealing with Windows systems.
4) If there is any other smarter solution, I believe somebody will add it to responses bellow.
Anyway, it's weird that your problem persists. There has to be something wrong with your filesystem, otherwise ls wouldn't show you question marks in its output. Did you perform chkdisk via GUI? It has to say that either there wasn't any error with your fs, or that there was some error. We live (unfortunatelly) in binary computer world. I mean you can perform that command from shell, or however microsoft calls it, and if you run it in a proper configuration, it will tell you whether your fs is bad or not and perform needed repairs.
And how to format disk to ext4?
Backup your data, run as root fdisk /dev/yourexthdd (fdisk /dev/sdd), delete all partitions, create new ones, once you are done, write changes down. fdisk is pretty easy to use, don't be afraid of it. Then you have to create filesystem on each partition you created with fdisk, so if you created only one, run mkfs.ext4 /dev/yourexthddwithpartnumber (mkfs.ext4 /dev/sdd1). There are nice articles about doing these things on Arch Wiki (https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/File_Systems), don't be worried to read them

Disk Configurations

I'm building a new system and have some questions about what sort of disk configuration to put together. Probably about 90% of my source will be AVCHD (more details in my earlier post). The articles on this forum are great and have been very helpful but I'm still confused. The Generic Guideline for Disk Setup talks about distributing access across as many disks as possible but then shows all configurations with more than 4 disks as placing everything except the OS, programs, and pagefile on the same RAID. A file is distributed across multiple disks in a RAID but it's one logical drive so there must be head contention if more than one file is needed at the same time from that RAID. Wouldn't a setup like this work better?
C: [1 Drive] OS, Programs
D: [RAID 3] Media, Projects
E: [RAID 0] Pagefile, Media Cache
F: [1 Drive] Previews, Exports
Would there be any problems having multiple RAIDs? In the above example, the RAID 3 would require a hardware controller and the RAID 0 could run off the ICH10R on the motherboard. Can ICH10R support multiple RAIDS (more than one RAID 0) and can a hardware controller (say, an Areca) support more than one RAID? If so, would it be better to run both the RAID 3 and RAID 0 in this example off the Areca?
To RAID or not to RAID has been helpful but I'm still not clear on everything. What are the differences between an inexpensive controller like the Areca ARC-1210 and the more expensive models which can cost 4 times as much? Obviously the more expensive controllers have faster processors and more cache but do you get 4 times the performance? I'm sure a high-end controller would be helpful if you're editing 4K files or uncompressed HD but I suspect it's not worth the expense for a mostly-AVCHD environment.
What about using RAID 0 for source media? I understand the likelihood of problems increases with the number of disks but what does that mean in the real world? I've been using my current drives (Seagate SCSIs) for about 7 years and have never had a problem. In fact I've owned computers with hard drives since the early 80s and don't believe I've ever had a disk fail on me. Of course everything needs to be backed up but how often might I be rebuilding a RAID 0 due to disk failure? Maybe I've been very lucky or maybe "they don't build 'em like they used to".
I've been using (parallel)SCSI for over 10 years but no longer believe it's cost effective. It seems like adding more SATA drives to a RAID would be cheaper than expensive 15K RPM SAS drives. Does everyone agree with that? Also, SAS drives are only available in much smaller capacities than SATA drives.
A hardware controller is required for RAID 3 and strongly recommended for RAID 5 but do they offer an advantage for RAID 0? What about for RAID 10? One advantage would be providing extra ports since most motherboards only provide 6 SATA ports. Does one motherboard offer any better SATA and RAID performance than any other or are they all about the same in that regard?
Is there any advantage to external RAIDS other than convenience in moving data from one computer to another? It seems like a controller directly on the bus would be faster than one connected externally.
Is there any disadvantage to running SATA 3 drives on a SATA 2 controller? A possible advantage might be the larger cache that some SATA 3 drives have. Would a 64MB cache help much over a 32MB cache? I've also heard SATA 3 can increase burst speeds. If I have two SATA 3 ports, and I'm using one on an SSD for the OS, would it help to use the other port for another drive or might that take away bandwidth from the SSD?
I've run across some things (don't have links handy) that indicate there may be problems with drives larger than 2 TB. Is this just for single drives larger than 2 TB, RAIDs larger than 2 TB, or am I confused and this is not an an issue?
What about specific drives that are quiet and perform well? Quietness is important to me and I worry about building a box, with as many as 10 drives, sounding like an airport runway. I've heard the Caviar Blues are quieter than the Black but I don't think they perform as well. I've heard Samsung F3 are both quiet and fast and that's what I'm leaning towards at the moment. What's with the F4? Samsung's site says it's “Independently tested as the fastest 3.5” HDD available” yet it also refers to it as an “Eco-Green HDD”, which usually means slow.
Should I use different drives in RAIDs than standalone? I've heard “enterprise” models are better for RAIDs because of differences in their firmware error recovery. These sources say “consumer” models are more likely to time-out in a RAID because they have more aggressive error recovery. Is this true and should be a concern?
Roy

I'm looking forward to an answer too, because I have some of the same questions. I'm currently working with a systems integrator on a quote, and we are hashing out some details about a few things.
I do a lot of uncompressed 10-bit, as well as some 1080p60 projects. So, for the RAID, to date, I'm going for an Areca ARC-1880ix-16. Funny thing is, there is not much price difference between the 12 and 16 port model. So I'm going to go with the 16-port model, and upgrade the cache to 4GB. Seems well worth it. I'll probably start out with an 8 disk RAID setup, and upgrade it n the future if need be.
We did toy with the idea to build the RAID around SSDs.... Ouf, imagine having an 8 SSD RAID! (Corsair SSD Force Series 3). But realistically, I'll most likely go with normal SATA III drives. And since they are so inexpensive, I'll probably fill it to the brim. Or most likely, the capacity that the case can handle.
But Roy has a good point. What about distributing the load on the array? Would it be more appropriate to make 2 RAID groups on the card? To balance the traffic of the media, cache, previews, pagefile and export?
Roy, I can start answering some of your questions though (My years of being a PC tech comes in handy sometimes, hehe)
Would there be any problems having multiple RAIDs? In the above example, the RAID 3 would require a hardware controller and the RAID 0 could run off the ICH10R on the motherboard. Can ICH10R support multiple RAIDS (more than one RAID 0) and can a hardware controller (say, an Areca) support more than one RAID? If so, would it be better to run both the RAID 3 and RAID 0 in this example off the Areca?
From a technical standpoint, there are no problems running multiple RAIDs. But there would be a performance drawback if the RAID was software only (OS managed). Thankfully, on-board RAIDs do help, but there is still some CPU overhead to deal with on-boad RAID5, and very minimally RAID 0. Having a RAID card is always the better option if you can afford it. The performance, manageability and flexibility are unmatched, compared to any on-board motherboard RAID controllers. RAID 0 is simple and does not need much resources. So, yes, you could run the RAID 0 from the on-board controller of the motherboard. It would theoretically "offload" the 8x PCIe lane from extra traffic, but practically, I seriously doubt the disk I/O would exceed the PCIe bandwidth in the first place.
What about using RAID 0 for source media? I understand the likelihood of problems increases with the number of disks but what does that mean in the real world? I've been using my current drives (Seagate SCSIs) for about 7 years and have never had a problem. In fact I've owned computers with hard drives since the early 80s and don't believe I've ever had a disk fail on me. Of course everything needs to be backed up but how often might I be rebuilding a RAID 0 due to disk failure? Maybe I've been very lucky or maybe "they don't build 'em like they used to".
I use P2 media. So I practice double copies. A working copy on the computer, the other on an external HD as a backup copy. Everyone using solid state media to record on, should do the same. Having said that. You know what RAID 0 means? Zero chance of data recovery if 1 drive fails. The more drives in a RAID, the more likely a problem can arise. Packing drives tightly together will produce more heat if not well ventilated, and will reduce the life expectancy of any drive. I have come across some bad disks in my 20+ years dealing with computers as a tech. Not that many, but enough to not trust them, and enough to practice backups even if I had a RAID 5 or 6 (and a hotsparet). Even though I have a backup copy on an external drive for my source media, and even though I try to backup as often as I can, I can still loose other things (ancillary files) in my hypothetical RAID 0 media drive. Worst case? I could loose a day's worth of work, plus what ever time it takes to rebuild and restore everything from the previous night's backup (if I didn't forget). Time is money for most of us. And investing in a proper editing system is something I don't take lightly.
A hardware controller is required for RAID 3 and strongly recommended for RAID 5 but do they offer an advantage for RAID 0? What about for RAID 10? One advantage would be providing extra ports since most motherboards only provide 6 SATA ports. Does one motherboard offer any better SATA and RAID performance than any other or are they all about the same in that regard?
There are no major advantages to use a RAID 0 or 10 on a standard addon hardware RAID controller, other then to free up ports on the motherboard, or have a higher disk count on your RAID. But higher end RAID cards with bigger cache, will be faster. On-board RAIDs do have some overhead, but for RAID0, it's not as drastic as RAID5. Motherboard SATA RAIDs, with the same chipset, for all intents and purposes, are basically the same performance. There may be small variations from one manufacturer or another, but nothing real world measurable.
Is there any advantage to external RAIDS other than convenience in moving data from one computer to another? It seems like a controller directly on the bus would be faster than one connected externally.
Convenience, is subjectively proportional to your needs and disk quantity inside the computer casing. hehe What stops me from having more then 16 drives in my system, is the casing size for HDs and possible heat dissipation issues. I try to have a system that is self contained, and avoid using an external enclosure if I can. But regardless, the speed of internal and external ports on a RAID card is the same.
I've run across some things (don't have links handy) that indicate there may be problems with drives larger than 2 TB. Is this just for single drives larger than 2 TB, RAIDs larger than 2 TB, or am I confused and this is not an an issue?
Not an issue with Windows 7.
Frederic

Proper Hard Disk Configuration

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for