RAID for photography

[RaymondC]

<p>Hi, just out of interest,</p>

<p>Is it possible to have 2 sets of RAIDs in one computer? LIke 2x RAID 1? Like one may have a sys drive and a drive of photographs. </p>

<p>Would it be better to have a Raid 5 instead - with this set up, do you just shove all the sys files and pictures into the same logical drive? How would performance be? Or would one consider a 4 HDD RAID 5 set up for a better balance ...</p>

<p>Just out of intereset b/c for my hobby work I just sync my pictures into a 2nd partition of my sys drive and vice versa and i have a external drive too...</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

[danny_low]

Yes you can have multiple RAIDs in one computer. The big question is why would you want one? RAID is typically used by companies who cannot afford to have their computers go down due to disk problems. They are expensive and require managing by you. You need to periodically do integrity checks on the RAID to make sure that the data structures are intact. If something does go wrong, it is a major effort to recover.

 

 

If all you want is to recover lost files quickly due to disk crashes, the easiest and cheapest way to do it is buy an extra drive, preferably external, and get a file back program that automatically backs up new and changed files to the extra disk. For most people who are not running a business, RAID is a very expensive overkill that will be more work than you want to do.

 

 

If you do decide get a RAID, do not put your boot drive on the RAID. It should be on an ordinary drive. If a RAID crashes you first have to repair the RAID before you can access it. But if your OS is on the RAID you cannot boot up on it so you cannot repair the RAID. This is just one of many traps you can fall into when you use a RAID. That is why it recommended that you get a consultant to set up your RAID.

 

 

Danny

[steveg]

<blockquote>

<p>Just out of intereset b/c for my hobby work I just sync my pictures into a 2nd partition of my sys drive and vice versa and i have a external drive too...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You're not really achieving anything doing this as if your drive fails you'll loose both copies...<br>

Yes you can have two raid arrays - my computer is set up like that - two small fast drives in a raid 0 array for the operating system and application files. I also use this for the scratch disk for photoshop because it's fast - but DEFINATELY no data!<br>

For data storage I have a 3 disk raid 5 array.<br>

It's generally not recomended to have the operating system on a Raid 1 or 5 because of performance issues.</p>

<blockquote>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

[sattler123]

<p>When I bought my latest computer I had the same question in my mind. After careful consideration, I realized that RAID would really not buy me anything. I came up with my own backup strategy and am very confident that my pictures are safe now. I make multiple copies of all my pictures on a daily, weekly and monthly basis, incl. the LR catalog and keep one copy off-site in our safe deposit box.</p>

[john_deerfield]

<p>As Danny points out, a RAID system for consumer use is generally not worth the hassle. Lets start with RAID 1, the mirror RAID. This is an <em>exact</em> copy of your data. This is NOT a back up of your data. The <em>only</em> thing a RAID 1 protects you from is drive failure. It won't protect you from accidentally deleting a file, it won't protect you from a directory error that takes down both drives (the 2nd drive is an exact copy) it won't protect you from any number of snafus that are all more likely than a drive failure. Since the RAID 1 won't protect you from these other events, you still need a reliable back up. Now that you have a reliable back up, do you really need to protect yourself against one drive failing? If you believe so, I would simply use another back up drive and still skip the RAID 1!</p>

<p>Other RAID arrays try to increase speed. These are not without their own issues as well. A big one being that most are accomplished using software (since hardware RAIDs are expensive) and the software overhead negates any speed benefit!</p>

[mendel_leisk]

<p>I use multiple internal drives. They are autonomous, ie: not linked by any form of RAID. One of the drives I use as a complete mirror of another drive, a drive devoted to dslr raw's and master scan files. Another of the drives acts as a partial mirror of the sytem drive (c:). I accomplish this through a simple command line utility, XXCopy, run in a batch file when <em>I</em> choose to. Beyond this I'm using dual DVD backups.</p>

<p>Why do you want to use RAID? From my very rudimentary understanding, it seems to ensure that if <em>any</em> of your drives fail, your data is compromised or lost.</p>

[garrison_k.]

Yes, I have two sets of raids in two of my computers. I only do RAID 0 for performance. The first RAID 0 is set-up for the OS and files, and a second pair of hdd's in RAID 0 is set-up for scratch, LR library, and Bridge cache etc.

 

The only software I've been successful at cloning my drives with RAID is Norton Ghost. It's the only one that seems to recognize the boot loader/raid.

 

I back-up religiously with dvd's and external hdd's so having a raid 1, 5, or 10 to do it, would be a waste of space and energy.

 

I trust RAID O as much as I trust my hdd's so I do it and keep backed up. The Intel Matrix raid software is great and easy to set up.

[brad_smith8]

<p>There is so much misinformation in this thread that I recommend you do separate RAID research. I've been running a 4 drive RAID0 (striped) setup for years without a hitch. Yes RAID5 will give you speed and recover-ability. Whatever you do, have a backup so the worst that happens to your PC won't affect your data.</p>

[mattb1]

<p>I agree with Brad, a lot of misinformation here. </p>

<p>RAID is not very easy to implement, but it does offer a lot. If you are not experienced with building systems and RAID, I do not think I would suggest you build one. They will take a lot of time and knowledge to setup. It would be better to buy an external RAID drive or NAS. www.newegg.com has good user reviews of items they sell, I try and stay away from stuff that has a recent negative history.</p>

<p>If you really want to build a RAID array, I'd suggest looking at making a home server with one of the Linux versions. I'm looking at that right now, and almost have all the components together. The advantage is that it will have a long life and be sharable. You do not need the latest and greatest CPU, RAM, and video to have a good file server. It may not be as fast, but given the utility of it, it may be worth while to me.</p>

<p>I like RAID 1+0, also called 10. It is both mirrored and striped. It has saved me from drive failure, and it makes my system run MUCH faster. Implementing the striping was one of the biggest performance boosts to my system in years. </p>

<p>Is it worth it? For me yes, if just for the insurance against a hard drive failure. Is it a total backup solution? No.</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>Thanks.</p>

<p>@Brad.<br>

I have 2 internal drives. 1a - OS. 1b - sync copy of my 2nd drive. 2nd physical drive as my pictures as 1 partition. </p>

<p>I also have a external drive. </p>

<p>I used to have a RAID 1 but discontinued it b/c I found it does not protect you if you get hit with a virus or if you accidentally deleted a file yourself. Plus it cost more money - extra Hdds. I don't need the speed so forgone Raid 0. I am only a hobbyist so I really only print a few A3s per year matted up for an occasion. Per month I only edit 6 images at most for my SIG at the local photog club for discussion - not top stuff, just an event to get us outside shooting ...</p>

[RaymondC]

<p>@ Steve, initially I wanted RAID 1 for the OS b/c if the OS go kapuf, there goes the OS, my computer won't be able to start. Even thou I lose no data, it's a hassle.</p>

<p>But now I discontinued RAID, I have a Windows 7 image file on each of my 2 internal hdds and the external drive plus the my pix on the 2nd hdd synced to the 1st physical drive's 2nd partition.</p>

[steveg]

<p>Raids not for everybody - it's easy to set up and maintain IF you know what you're doing but is extra hassle if you don't. Also it can lead to a false sense of security - you still need a good backup / recovery regime in place.<br>

Used properly though it can give an extra element of protection against disk failure as mentioned elsewhere it offers no protection against accidental erasure etc.<br>

The best plan is to keep muliple copies of everything either on seperate drives (I use two external drives for this) and / or media such as DVDs.</p>