dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
3
share rss forum feed


norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback

1 edit
reply to me

Re: RAID 0 and restore image

You will not likely be able to do it unless the original image has the raid drivers on it.

You can set up a HDD with the image and then build a raid, but the drivers for the raid have to be added offline, not just installed via device manager or copied off a disk. Then you affect AHCI, HAL and other components of the operating system - it is not a nice easy task. This involves extracting files via recovery console etc and unless you are a very competent operator of the command line, it will be just too difficult.

Also things like the HDD's are they the same size?
What motherboard do you have?
Is it a raid card or on board raid, etc?

With the info you have provided, I'd say no.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke



me

join:2002-12-08
Iapetus

Both hard drives are Seagate 2TB exact same.

Gigabyte GA-z77x-d3h

It has this feature:
GIGABYTE eXtreme Hard Drive (X.H.D)
automatically and quickly set up a RAID 0 array.

Marvell 88SE9172 chip supports RAID 0 and RAID 1.

Also, I read somewhere that using Acronis as the backup software worked for some people.
I found this with a quick search.
"It installs boot device drivers (e.g. hard drive or RAID controller drivers) into the system during the recovery process, so that the operating system can boot from this boot device"

»kb.acronis.com/content/4000



koitsu
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:23

I think you may be in for a rude awakening when you try this.

The underlying "drive geometry" when using RAID completely changes compared to a standalone disk. A standalone disk may show X Y and Z values, while the geometry of the "disk" (RAID volume) will be completely/entirely different.

Depending on how the backup software behaves and at what level, this may or may not work for you.

Furthermore, the actual device naming semantics tend to change under Windows when you change storage drivers. I.e. you're going from native AHCI to some "mystery vendor-lock-in" crap ("Gigabyte Marketing Hooplah") driven by the Marvell 9172 chip.

For example, if I switch my BIOS from from standard SATA (i.e. non-AHCI) to AHCI (and I despite having Intel's RST drivers installed), BSOD is the result. Why? Because Windows refers to the "root device" (OS device) by a unique string, something like \\.PhysicalDrive0 or \\?\Device\HarddiskVolumeX (I forget which) -- while Intel RST results in this being called something like \\Device\Ide\iaStor0 (I forget the exact name). You'll see something like this, and possibly only for a split second:

»i40.servimg.com/u/f40/09/00/63/8···o210.jpg

Or possibly this:

»img231.imageshack.us/img231/287/···rror.jpg

It's probably named something very different with the XHD/Marvell stuff.

My advice is:

1. Don't bother screwing around and spending hours/days dealing with this -- configure the RAID-0 array, and reinstall Windows fresh on it (assuming it will even see your array, re: what others have told you about drivers),
2. Be aware of what you're giving up by going with this XHD and Marvell controller. More often than not you lose visibility into the drives themselves (such as being able to examine SMART attributes to see if a drive is actually having issues). Ask yourself if you really need RAID-0 (you probably don't and just want to fool around -- consider something like an SSD instead),
3. If despite the above you still want to do it, make sure you're doing backups regularly (I would advise daily). You know how it goes with RAID-0 -- the instant you experience any anomaly with the storage subsystem on any drive, you lose your entire array.

Finally, you might want to ask Gigabyte Technical Support the exact same question you asked folks here on DSLR/BBR. They may be able to tell you what to expect.

Good luck.
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.



me

join:2002-12-08
Iapetus

Such an informative an well thought-out reply.
Thank you for that.

My reason for going with RAID 0 as apposed to ssd is that I will be capturing live video streams and that data is raw and uncompressed or formated. SSD write speed for this kind of data is actually slower than a regular hard drive. The size limitation is a factor also.



norwegian
Premium
join:2005-02-15
Outback


As pointed out start fresh and load the raid drivers at the F6 prompt if using XP or the 'addition drivers' notification of Win 7.

Anything else would be too arduous and the fact that trying to mod as such a low level to make it work would not guarantee the speeds would be obtained either due to possible incorrect call functions and hence those BSOD's pointed out above, raid 0 is risky enough without having troubles added by trying to compromise.

Do it correctly and do it once, and as mentioned backup the array.
I'd almost go looking at an extra drive or 2 and looking at raid 5.

quote:
Support for RAID 0, RAID 1, RAID 5, and RAID 10
Then you will help avoid total loss of that raw data of your projects if there are hdd/sata cable failure etc.

That might be the better option for your needs.
--
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing - Edmund Burke