Warning

 

Close
Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Cancel Confirm
AR15.COM
8/6/2009 5:42:43 AM EDT
Need some help...

I had a physical HD failure in a RAID 0 array. It's not a big deal since the array only held the OS, programs, and sratch disks for photoshop and video editing

The important stuff is in a seperate RAID 1 array.

So...I want to make sure I don't F up the RAID 1 HD while reinstalling the OS and programs to the failed array.

What precautions should I take? I can't back it up easily since I can't load an OS....I guess I could load Knoppix or whatever and offload all of that stuff to an external HD


Thoughts?
8/6/2009 6:18:43 AM EDT
[#1]
Don't RAID 0 the OS?
8/6/2009 6:20:35 AM EDT
[#2]
OS = Windows?
8/6/2009 6:23:35 AM EDT
[#3]
Hardware or software RAID?
8/6/2009 6:23:51 AM EDT
[#4]
Why would you put the OS on a RAID-0?  I can see it for speed-sensitive data like video, but for a kernel?
8/6/2009 6:30:12 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Why would you put the OS on a RAID-0?  I can see it for speed-sensitive data like video, but for a kernel?


It was mainly for the scratch disks

it's faster if you keep them on different volumes than the regular storage volumes (which are RAID 1)

8/6/2009 7:11:50 AM EDT
[#6]

I never really saw the concept of RAID 0 as worth it. I mean yeah, you are gaining some speed by striping, but when a drive fails, you have zero redundancy, and all the other drives in the raid zero array are good only to be formatted. RAID zero does not allow recreation of the data when a new drive is put in like other RAID levels. To me the whole purpose of RAID is redundancy, hence the name "Redundant array of inexpensive disks".

RAID 0 has zero redundancy, and some tests show that mirroring can actually be faster (ok, at double the cost of disk space). I think I would rather spend the money on faster hardware than go RAID 0. Just my opinion on it.
8/6/2009 7:24:04 AM EDT
[#7]
Disconnet the other raid 1 array if you have to rebuild from scratch.

If you did it right all you should need to do is slap another drive in your raid0 array and reimage.
8/6/2009 8:34:24 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:

I never really saw the concept of RAID 0 as worth it. I mean yeah, you are gaining some speed by striping, but when a drive fails, you have zero redundancy, and all the other drives in the raid zero array are good only to be formatted. RAID zero does not allow recreation of the data when a new drive is put in like other RAID levels. To me the whole purpose of RAID is redundancy, hence the name "Redundant array of inexpensive disks".

RAID 0 has zero redundancy, and some tests show that mirroring can actually be faster (ok, at double the cost of disk space). I think I would rather spend the money on faster hardware than go RAID 0. Just my opinion on it.




Eh...   Everyone should understand a RAID array is NOT a redundant system.  


It is a fault tolerant system.


The difference is significant.
8/6/2009 10:04:58 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:

I never really saw the concept of RAID 0 as worth it. I mean yeah, you are gaining some speed by striping, but when a drive fails, you have zero redundancy, and all the other drives in the raid zero array are good only to be formatted. RAID zero does not allow recreation of the data when a new drive is put in like other RAID levels. To me the whole purpose of RAID is redundancy, hence the name "Redundant array of inexpensive disks".

RAID 0 has zero redundancy, and some tests show that mirroring can actually be faster (ok, at double the cost of disk space). I think I would rather spend the money on faster hardware than go RAID 0. Just my opinion on it.


I'm intrigued by 0+1 and 1+0.
8/6/2009 10:06:45 AM EDT
[#10]
If you used hardware RAID, just reinstall the OS and whatnot as normal, and make sure you don't choose the RAID 1 array for the OS installation.  The OS will simply see the array as another disk.

I don't know if things are different with software RAID, though I imagine they are.  I always avoided software RAID for a variety of reasons.
8/6/2009 10:10:20 AM EDT
[#11]
I'm confused: if you have enough disks to make a RAID 0 and a RAID 1, then you have enough disks to make a RAID 5.
8/6/2009 10:23:34 AM EDT
[#12]
Guys, you're drifting. He is not asking about what raid is best or asking you to tell him what he should or should not be doing.  He is asking about reinstalling the OS without stomping an existing volume.

8/6/2009 12:48:10 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Guys, you're drifting. He is not asking about what raid is best or asking you to tell him what he should or should not be doing.  He is asking about reinstalling the OS without stomping an existing volume.


Whatever he had on the RAID 0 is gone.  If he reinstalls the OS and RAID drivers (without touching the RAID 1), then the RAID 1 should become visible and accessible without any loss of data.

To OP:

If you're using a hardware RAID, just unplug the board and drives (keep the cables attached and just move the board out of the way).  After the OS is reinstalled, plug everything back up and install the drivers and everything should be ok.  If you're using the RAID on your motherboard, then you just need to make sure you install the OS on the new drive and not the RAID 1 (shouldn't be a problem since Windows probably won't be able to see the RAID until after the drivers are installed).  If you're using software RAID, then (again) make sure you're installing the OS on a drive that doesn't belong to the RAID 1 set, reinstall the drivers, a everything should become available to the OS.