On Fri, Dec 01, 2006 at 09:57:41 +0800, Hadders <fedora@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > But then I figured, hmmm, why not go to RAID 0 SATAII, performance will > be sweet, and then I can dual boot between XP/FC On a typical home system, you probably aren't being limited by your disk speed most of the time. So you might want to use raid 1 instead of raid 0. You will still get read performance benefits, but noit write performance. However, in event of a disk failure, you can still use your system while waiting for a replacement disk to arrive. > But had no idea how to do this for Linux, but have setup software RAID > before. One way to do is is to set up a custom partition configuration when installing fedora. > 1. All I need to do is add the kernel patch, but this will only let me > see the SATA RAID container Usually there are bios settings to disable raid in the bios and then you should be OK without having to use a custom patch. Though I am not familiar with your particular hardware, so you might really have to do that. > 2. I must then use software RAID to create a RAID 0 array, as there's > no RAID being done in hardware, because it's not really a hardware RAID > chipset and that for Windows it probably just does its own software RAID > with the driver provided, but for Linux lets you do this yourself, cause > why reinvent the wheel? Software raid under Linux is generally going to be faster than using cheap psuedo hardware raid controller. (If you are going to bother with a hardware raid controller you should get a real one with battery backed cache.) If you are pegging your CPU with other tasks this might not be true, but that isn't normal. Software raid under linux is gennerally more flexible about how you are allowed to mix and match partitions forming the array(s). You aren't locked into specific hardware to get your data back. Typically if a hardware raid controller goes, you need to buy a replacement from the same company or perhaps the same card (which may not be produced any more).
