Raid-0 Win 2000 problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter Outback Jack
  • Start date Start date
O

Outback Jack

Guest
Hello everyone. I really need some help.

I just finished my first build and I'm having problems getting Win 2000 to install with the raid 0. It usually locks up during the setup phase.

I'm using the promise controller but the same thing happens with the Via.

Win 2000 installs fine when the drives are configured by themselves and in raid-1. Also Win 98se works fine with all configs. BTW I'm trying for a dual boot.

I've looked at Bas's troubleshooting guide and tried to disable the APIC but the bios doesn't have a disable choice.

Does anyone have some suggestions?

P.s. this is my first post, please forgive newbie mistakes
 
One more question.

Since 98se has been working I've been using that for now. But when I copy files onto the hard drive, the transfer rate seems pretty slow. Really not much faster than a standard HD. It takes 3 1/2 minutes to transfer 2 1/2 gigs between partitions. I did the math and that comes out to less than 13 megs per second. SATA claims 150megs/sec. I've installed the sata drivers in windows. Is there anthing else I can do?

And is there a utility that can tell me the exact data transfer rate for the hard drives?
 
Originally posted by Outback Jack
One more question.

Since 98se has been working I've been using that for now. But when I copy files onto the hard drive, the transfer rate seems pretty slow. Really not much faster than a standard HD. It takes 3 1/2 minutes to transfer 2 1/2 gigs between partitions. I did the math and that comes out to less than 13 megs per second. SATA claims 150megs/sec. I've installed the sata drivers in windows. Is there anthing else I can do?

And is there a utility that can tell me the exact data transfer rate for the hard drives?

I am tempted to exhale and "oh dear god man", but as you are a newbie, I will give you a brief rundown on how drives work.

NO drives achieve sustained data transfer at the interface rate (150mb/s for SATA, 100mb/s for ata4), the drives simply cannot present data to the heads fast enough, that and most sata drives are actually just ATA4 drives with an SATA interface, which actually slows them down. Indeed, IDE is still not a serious performer in terms of sustained speed, that is the sole domain of modern SCSI drives (although, SATA does promise to allow IDE drives to rival SCSI speeds, when they start to produce reasonably sized 10k and 15k rpm SATA drives). The rotational speed of a drive and, to a much lesser extent, number of heads and width of data bus determines its maximum sustained data transfer speed, which is always significantly lower than its "burst" speed.

The speed rate is for burst transfer out of cache. Furthermore, you said "data from one partition to another", ie ON THE SAME DISK. Therefore, ignoring overheads from the OS (in windows, file system OS is massive, particularly for NTFS which has a ridiculous number of indices), your drive must first READ and then WRITE the same data to the disk, even if your move was so perfectly syncronised as to read the data from one head when another was perfectly positioned to write it (all but impossible), your drive would be operating at HALF of its possible sustained transfer rate; most likely it will be much less so. However, if you were moving the data to the same partition, it would appear "instantaneous" as the OS doesn't move the data, merely updates indexes so the data appears to be elsewhere on the filesystem.

So, unless you have a 10k rpm SATA drive, no hope whatsoever of achieving a high data transfer rate (I wouldnt plan on exceeding 40mb/s sustained data transfer from any IDE drive, although the SATA data bus should allow this to improve, I havent seen better than 40mb/s sustained from an IDE drive would be more accurate a statement).

I recommend googling for some more nfo on drive technology if you are really interested in understanding it; but it helps to think about what is physically occuring in the operation when you are trying to form judgements relating to speed/performance.

err!
jak.

ps: I didnt know small places like texas had outbacks, down here we have farms the size of texas in the outback ;)
 
Are you entering whendows setup and pressing F6 when your prompted for other driver? If so then did you scroll down to the Promise 378 raid controller device driver or just picking something from the 3 it shows?

I hase mine set to dual boot win2kpro and xp64 from two of my drives. It works just fine.

Edited to add; I just saw your Power supply size. At 18 amps on the 12 volt bus you may be getting issues with having too little juice to make everything operate. 18Amp seems to be minimal for small systems and with a raid your no longer considured small. If you have a frind that has a better PSU that handles more amps on that bus you may want to try it if you continue to see problems.
 
Hi guys,

Riprjak: Thanks for the info. I figured the 150 meg/sed figure was more for advertising but I was hoping for a more dramatic improvment over my old drives. Oh well, I guess I'll just wait another 4 years and see how more drives have improved by then. On the bright side, these new drives are MUCH more quiet than my old ones! I'm almost going to regret moving my old drives over when I have this 2000 pro problem licked.

Tiresmoke: Thank you also. Yeah, I've been using the F6 raid install thing and using the "Windows 2000 Promise Fasttrak 378" (By scrolling down. But it did take a couple of tries before I found it!). Sorry, I forgot to mention that earlier.

I really hope it isn't the power supply. I already have one unused POS supply I bought on sale before I learned about the power supply issue. The one I'm using now is better but I'll look into it.

Edited: Hey! I just had a thought or it may be wishful thinking.
Win 98se installs fine in the current setup (RAID0) and 2000 pro installs normally in RAID1. The problem only occurs when I switch the setup to RAID0. If it were just a power problem it wouldn't work at all would it? Maybe I'll won't have to buy a 3rd supply.
 
Huh??? How many drives do you have?

Raid-0 = striping or performance. What that means is your using both drives as a single driive by writing in a special way that spans both drives.

Raid-1 = redundancy or backup. By writing the same thing to both drives at once you get a mirror image copy on both drives. This provide security against losing data.

Now if you want you can combine raid-0 and raid-1 by using more than one set of drives. One set provides your performance striping under raid-0 and the second set provides a mirror image of the first set.

If you only have two drives you will either have raid 0 or 1 but not both.
 
I'm using only RAID 0 but I tried other combinations of the 2 disks (normal and raid 1) while trying to troubleshoot . Currently I'm using raid 0 and 98se without any problmes at all. The problem only occurs when I try to install Win 2000 on the raid 0.
 
Back
Top