# Adding to a Raid 0 array



## johnspack (May 19, 2008)

I want to add a 3rd 320gig hd to the existing 2 I already have in raid 0.  It looks like it will be easy using my nvidia mediashield,  something like going into the create menu and then allocating a spare drive?  I would like to do this without losing data...  Is it as easy as it looks?


----------



## kenkickr (May 19, 2008)

I do not believe you can add drives to an existing RAID 0.  If you are running say RAID 5 or 0+1(I know there are more but not going to list all of them) you can replace a damaged drive or add drives but since with most RAID 0 are configured within the RAID card or RAID onboard chip bios you just can't simple add to an existing strip array.  Please let me know if I am wrong


----------



## johnspack (May 19, 2008)

Hope so too,  all I know is that in my raid create menu,  there is an option to "allocate spare drive"  and to "deallocate spare drive".  I guess I'll do a major backup first...


----------



## DaedalusHelios (May 19, 2008)

With intel raid chipsets you can..... with nvidia raid chipsets you cannot.

PS. With Intel you just use the intel Matrix storage manager. I have done it only once though.


----------



## Cybrnook2002 (May 19, 2008)

Hmmmm, I think if your running a RAID 0 its not going to work either way. Because logically RAID 0 stripes the two drives together, then breaks the data packages up into 128kb clusters usually (size I use), then divides them among the two drives. Making it impossible to lodge a third drive in it. Also, you cant have a RAID 0 setup with three drives. Maybe RAID 0 +1. But your not going to get anymore performance out of three drives. Better to use the third for back up for when one of the drives in your array decides to go to sleep.


----------



## Deleted member 3 (May 19, 2008)

Most cheap controllers don't support online expansion or migration. ie increasing the size of an array or turning it into another RAID level. Besides, 900GB of data in RAID 0, I wouldn't recommend that.


----------



## johnspack (May 19, 2008)

Darn,  was hoping for the extra performance.  Guess I'll just grab a 500gb backup drive,  as I really need the extra room.


----------



## thebeephaha (May 19, 2008)

I have 4 80GB Raptors in RAID0. 2 drives to 3 was a small increase in performance, the 4th didn't do much at all.

I honestly wouldn't worry about it and danthebanjoman made a good point that 900GB RAID0 is bad.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (May 19, 2008)

Cybrnook2002 said:


> Hmmmm, I think if your running a RAID 0 its not going to work either way. Because logically RAID 0 stripes the two drives together, then breaks the data packages up into 128kb clusters usually (size I use), then divides them among the two drives. Making it impossible to lodge a third drive in it. Also, you cant have a RAID 0 setup with three drives. Maybe RAID 0 +1. But your not going to get anymore performance out of three drives. Better to use the third for back up for when one of the drives in your array decides to go to sleep.



You can with the Intel Matrix storage manager. I have done it before. Its even mentioned in motherboard manuals of the motherboards that have a ICH9R Southbridge. It says to use AHCI for some reason. 

Yes, a third drive does increase performance some.


----------



## johnspack (May 19, 2008)

I would like to add the 3rd drive in raid,  but would have to find a way to backup about 300gigs,  way too many dvds...  and I think this onboard nvidia controller probably can't add more drives to an existing array.   I may just get the storage drive for now,  and a 3rd raid drive later.


----------



## johnspack (May 23, 2008)

Update:  have been compressing and archiving data to dvds.. plus a couple of spare older hds.   I am going to add a 3rd 320gig to the array next week.  I need the room,  and I've got to see if there's any more performance to be had.  Will be adding a 500 or 750gig storage hd next month.  Stay tuned for results..  I may post benchies of the 3 hds in raid.


----------



## ntdouglas (May 28, 2008)

johnspack said:


> Update:  have been compressing and archiving data to dvds.. plus a couple of spare older hds.   I am going to add a 3rd 320gig to the array next week.  I need the room,  and I've got to see if there's any more performance to be had.  Will be adding a 500 or 750gig storage hd next month.  Stay tuned for results..  I may post benchies of the 3 hds in raid.




Let me know. I was thinking of trying that.


----------



## johnspack (May 29, 2008)

Nice results so far,  I screwed up the first time I created the array,  64k chunks.  This time with 3 drives 128k chunks and upto 40% higher burst than before.  Large file transfer is through the roof!  3 drives is faster than 2.  I think these controllers choke out after about 4 drives.  I have a pile of benchies to prove the 3 is faster than the 2...  if anyone really needs proof I'll host the darn jpgs myself to show it.  Anyways,  if you've paid close to 200 dollars for a mobo and want to use raid,  do it.  If you spend more,  then you've gone intel.  Heheh...  or have gone caching controller which is 300+.. either way.  Oh and benchies show upto 40% higher bandwidth in bursts and upto 20% more bandwidth in standard r/w operations.


----------



## ntdouglas (May 29, 2008)

johnspack said:


> Nice results so far,  I screwed up the first time I created the array,  64k chunks.  This time with 3 drives 128k chunks and upto 40% higher burst than before.  Large file transfer is through the roof!  3 drives is faster than 2.  I think these controllers choke out after about 4 drives.  I have a pile of benchies to prove the 3 is faster than the 2...  if anyone really needs proof I'll host the darn jpgs myself to show it.  Anyways,  if you've paid close to 200 dollars for a mobo and want to use raid,  do it.  If you spend more,  then you've gone intel.  Heheh...  or have gone caching controller which is 300+.. either way.  Oh and benchies show upto 40% higher bandwidth in bursts and upto 20% more bandwidth in standard r/w operations.




Awesome. Now was this done thru nvidia media shield? And if so, what type of raid?


----------



## johnspack (May 29, 2008)

Yep, using the native mediashield raid controller,  I'm still being surprised by it.  Load and copy times on large files is through the roof.  Now I'm wondering what a good priced caching controller card could do for me...

edit:  using raid0 and using 128k chunks


----------



## ntdouglas (May 30, 2008)

You didn't have to reload windows?


----------



## johnspack (May 30, 2008)

Yes of course I did.  And I had to blank the first 2 disks first.  Then recreate the array with all 3 disks,  then yes reinstall.  I've got about another week of installing to do before my system is the way I like!!  I made an image backup of my os from the 2 drive array,  and restored it to my 3 drive array,  but it wouldn't boot... ug.  Don't know why.  But still worth it..


----------



## ntdouglas (May 30, 2008)

Well I ask because I have a backup drive and I enabled raid for it bios. I rebooted and the nvidia media shield window came up wanting to format and configure my new drive. I didn't do it obviously but without even continuing my hd tach bench doubled.


----------



## johnspack (Jun 2, 2008)

Thats pretty strange,  I'll have to try that!  Also,  I didn't try to just add the drive to the array,  maybe it will do it....  Oh well too late now,  I did it the hard way.  Maybe I'll try it again when I add my 4th drive.


----------

