| 1 |
Grant schrieb: |
| 2 |
> My desktop currently runs one of these: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148140 |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I'm pretty much out of space and I'm trying figure out the best way to |
| 7 |
> expand. The factors to consider are cost, capacity, speed, noise, and |
| 8 |
> heat. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
So you don't care about security, right? With security I mean redundancy |
| 11 |
(RAID1,5,10,...) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> Should I get another identical drive and set up RAID, or will |
| 14 |
> that create too much noise and heat? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
A RAID won't cause more heat or noise than a second drive but it will |
| 17 |
also not necessarily solve your problem: RAID0 gives you the capacity of |
| 18 |
both drives combined and a lot of speed but if one of the disks dies, |
| 19 |
all data is lost. RAID1 spends the complete capacity of one of the |
| 20 |
drives for redundancy. RAID5 needs three drives (so it doesn't fit into |
| 21 |
your cost, noise and heat requirements), gives you the capacity of two |
| 22 |
and enough redundancy to loose one disk. However, its write performance |
| 23 |
isn't extremely high. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Should I get rid of my current |
| 26 |
> drive and get a new drive, or will that not be much faster? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Your drive is good, why should you scrap it? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> Velociraptors are reputed to be very fast, but $200 for 300GB is |
| 31 |
> pretty expensive and 1TB would require 4 drives which I think would |
| 32 |
> create a lot of noise and heat. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
There are two "brute force" ways for an HDD to get faster: You increase |
| 36 |
their rpm or you increase their storage density (so that in one |
| 37 |
rotation, the r/w head can read/write more data). The latter has the |
| 38 |
advantage that it causes no additional heat or noise but more rpm give |
| 39 |
you lower access times. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I'd say if you don't care about redundancy, you should go for a single |
| 42 |
1TB disk. I'd prefer a Samsung Spinpoint F1. Spinpoints have the |
| 43 |
reputation of being a good mix between cost effectiveness, speed and noise. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Then I would use it (and the older disk) in an LVM volume group. LVM |
| 46 |
also supports mirroring (like RAID1) and striping (like RAID0) on a |
| 47 |
per-volume basis. That means that you could keep most of your data |
| 48 |
somewhere on the TB disk and still experiment with mirroring and |
| 49 |
striping using both disks for partitions which need more speed or more |
| 50 |
security. |
Archives