2 Node Storage only on RAID0 Bad or Good idea?

bkdilse · Mon Sep 24, 2018 6:42 pm

Hi,

I'm after the best performance, so I was thinking about creating a 2 Node Storage Only system, using 4 Disks on RAID0. I'm aware of the disk failure risks, but thought as it's replicated, it should not be a massive concern.

Am I missing something?
Good idea or bad?

Thanks

Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:08 pm

Hello bkdilse,

Thank you for your question. Could you please specify the disks type and their capacity? Generally, I suggest you consider the RAID 5. It will take the capacity of one drive and write operations will be slower, but you can withstand a single drive failure on both nodes simultaneously. Also, yes, with RAID 0, StarWind will failover to the second node in case of a disk failure, but if something happens to a single drive on both nodes simultaneously, your environment will be lost.

But again, that is, actually, the question of priority. If your data is not of crucial importance for you, then yes, RAID 0 will do the job. In this case, however, regular backups are highly recommended.

Kind regards,
Orest

bkdilse · Mon Sep 24, 2018 8:14 pm

Thanks for your response.

The disks are WD Red 6TB.

Agreed, RAID0 would be the best for performance, but in the very unlikely event of 1 disk failing on both nodes, I would have a nightmare restoring from backup. I'm now thinking RAID10 for better performance. Not too worried about 50% loss of storage capacity, as I need the best performance with redundancy.

What do you think about that?

Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:12 pm

According to https://knowledgebase.starwindsoftware. ... ssd-disks/ RAID10 is the proper option to use in case your setup is based on HDDs. This is for both performance and redundancy, and thus is what you are ultimately after.

bkdilse · Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:36 pm

I saw that article after posting.

I'll go with that.

Thanks

Mon Sep 24, 2018 9:50 pm

You are welcome. Feel free to post any other questions you might have further on.

serhiogo · Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:10 pm

bkdilse wrote: I'm now thinking RAID10 for better performance. Not too worried about 50% loss of storage capacity, as I need the best performance with redundancy.

+1

Mon Oct 08, 2018 8:37 am

It's the right choice!