Re: Raid 0 X SCSI

"Pavel" <Atin90@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:up6v3UkVFHA.3540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Kerry,
>
> For those that know SCSI as you do, you know that all this you mentioned
> is possible because the controller does all the processing instead of the
> CPU handling all the tasks. I may not have used the right words when I
> said that there is no difference but if the average person goes and spends
> the additional money for SCSI drive just to have his/hers Outlook PST file
> or some other data file be more fail safe then that person is simply
> wasting his money.
> As I have replied to Matt, I would not have anything else but fast 15k
> SCSI raid because of all the benefits that you mentioned.
>
> --
> Pavel
>

Point taken. For most people the hassle and cost of SCSI outweigh the
benefits. If redundancy is the issue then a IDE RAID controller or even
software RAID can accomplish it much cheaper.

Kerry

>
> "Kerry Brown" <kerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx*a*m> wrote in message
> news:OUZ3BOkVFHA.2740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> "Pavel" <Atin90@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:euVJFAkVFHA.1404@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Since the system was installed on non-scsi drive, most likely there is
>>> no scsi raid drive installed and your drive will most likely not boot
>>> with out this driver. This driver has to be installed in the early
>>> stages of installation.
>>> What you need to do before cloning is simply install the SCSI raid
>>> driver in the existing windows and then do the cloning. That should do
>>> it.
>>> But I am curious....are you adding the SCSI thinking that it will make
>>> your system more "fail safe"? or you just want to have a backup of your
>>> drive? The SCSI does not offer anything special. The only advantage with
>>> SCSI is the ability to do all the data processing on it's own
>>> controller instead of having the CPU do it.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Pavel
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Your right about the driver. I forgot about that when posting about
>> editing boot.ini. Your wrong about SCSI only having one advantage. :-) If
>> you are doing video editing, running a server, generating large database
>> reports, anything that demands high CPU time while simultaneously
>> accessing the hard drive SCSI has much faster performance. Also "most"
>> SCSI drives have higher MTBF, faster rotation therefore faster sustained
>> data transfer etc. There is a reason SCSI drives are more expensive. SATA
>> may eventually equal them but at that point they will cost the same and
>> require expensive hardware controllers as well.
>>
>> Kerry
>>
>>
>>> "Zalman" <zalman@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:u%23NeZFjVFHA.3108@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> Sorry if this has been answered before, I did a search and could not
>>>> find.
>>>> I have my Windows XP Pro setup and running ok on a RAID 0 configuration
>>>> (2 seagate 80gb barracudas).
>>>> I know RAID 0 is not fail safe, so I am planning to buy a SCSI Hard
>>>> Drive and clone my OS to the SCSI using Northon Gosth.
>>>>
>>>> Question: Will that work? I mean, everything is working fiine, if I
>>>> clone to the SCSI will I be able to boot?
>>>> What problems may I face if I ever do this?
>>>> Waiting your answer before rushing to the stores.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>


.

Relevant Pages