XP/Win2k RAID question

[UncleS]

A friend of mine is building a computer for his brother's business. His brother insists that he wants to use RAID1 to mirror the discs. I guess he had a catastrophic failure before and wants to make sure he never has that loss of data again. The plan was to use XP Pro but that doesn't support RAID1.

He is using the Asus a7v8x mobo. This supports both RAID0 and RAID1 at the mobo level. Here's the question. If the mobo supports RAID1 is it still OS dependant? I don't know if a mobo with RAID built-in just writes to both drives independant of the OS or if he will still need to use Win2k Server for RAID1 support.

Neither one of us has any real experience with RAID.

[Tuf]

Yes you can run the RAID setup with XP. It's the RAID controller that decides the configuration not the OS. Remember to tell him he still needs to backup as if a software problem renders one drive unusable it will also affect the other drive. All mirroring the drive will do is protect you from hardware failure of one drive. Which is in my opinion worth doing on a mission critical machine. I think a SCSI raid solution is a much better choice than IDE RAID but that's a different question. It's also much more expensive.

[UncleS]

I have never worked with RAID so this is new to me. But, if you put in a either IDE or SCSI raid controller card (not integrated into the mobo) doesn't the OS now have to control the RAID array? If not than why does MS say RAID1 not supported by XP Pro? If so than we are back to needing Win2k Server version. When I looked it up on Newegg it was just under $700 and came with 5 client liscences. He doesn't need it with clients. As I understand this is going to be a high-end stand alone machine or on a simple LAN. It is not going to be used as a domain controller.

[mike breck]

Hi UncleS,

Where did your friend read that XP Pro doesn't supports RAID 1?

As XP Pro supports RAID 1 even in software RAID (i.e. using XP to set up a RAID configuration using dynamic volumes) then there is certainly not a problem using RAID 1 Hardware RAID (i.e. using on onboard controller or PCI controller card).

http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;EN-US;307880

Either onboard or PCI RAID controllers have their own BIOS and so they can control the RAID configuration.

He could go for RAID 1 and then backup data to a third HD which is not part of the RAID array. This could either be in the same machine, another PC on the LAN, or in a removable HD rack i.e. the HD is just slid into the front of the PC to copy data and then removed to a safe location.

Secondary backups should also be done onto CD-R or CD-RW.

A removable HD rack is also a solution to corruption of the OS on the RAID 1 array. You can have a cloned copy of XP with all the programs on it. If the array goes down, then you just whack in your tray with the removable HD and the system is back up and running again.

In fact, if the PC is a standalone machine or part of a simple LAN, then that method is just as good as RAID.

HTH

[UncleS]

Actually Mike, the article you linked to states "You cannot create mirrored volumes on computers that are running Windows XP Home Edition, Windows XP Professional or Windows XP 64-Bit Edition". This statement was the basis for WinXP does not support RAID1. The "How To" was about using XP to set up a mirror on a Win2k box.

However, thanks for clarifing that if he uses a hardware RAID controller that the controller card controls the array not the OS. I am assuming however that there are some kind of drivers needed to allow the RAID controller to communicate with XP.

[mike breck]

Right, I'm with you. You thought the same remote server setup might apply if you were using hardware controllers. With the hardware solution, that won't be necessary.

Yes, RAID drivers are needed for hardware controllers and would usually be loaded during the OS install when the "Press F6 if you need to install third party SCSI or RAID driver" message appears.

HTH

[Tuf]

I can tell you for sure...I am at this very moment looking at four of my very own computers that are running Windows XP Pro using RAID arrays.

Windows will interface with your RAID controller but the controller does the work much like Windows interfaces with an IDE drive and it stores your data.

[Tuf]

I just reread your hardware list more thoroughly. If this is indeed a mission critical machine he may want to invest in a board that has a more stable chipset than the VIA one. Also SCSI RAID is more dependable than IDE and good SCSI drives are of much better quality than IDE drives.

It is also more expensive to use SCSI equipment in initial outlay. In the long it's probably cheaper. My computers make my living and I wouldn't use an IDE drive to store critical data. It's a decision he will have to make.

[UncleS]

Thanks guys. I will pass the info on.