Notebooks w/ RAID? 62
macemoneta asks: "Are there any notebooks available on the market that support (bootable) RAID (at least two 40GB+ drives as RAID0 and or RAID1)? While the rest of the components in 'desktop replacement' notebooks are quickly getting up to snuff, the hard drives are anemic in performance, capacity and reliability compared to desktops. Being able to use software RAID to create high performance meta devices and high reliability meta devices would really kick notebooks into high gear. Before anyone complains about size, weight, power and heat remember that notebooks have gone from 12 inch screens to 16 inch screens and 486 to P4M in the last few years. Most desktop replacement laptops use the batteries as a UPS, since they usually only last 90 minutes or less anyway."
Wha? (Score:1)
Multiple drives? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Multiple drives? (Score:2)
What is your reason for wanting RAID? (Score:1)
Faster throughput?
Data protection against failure?
Larger partition (one massive partition across two drives)?
Impress your friends? (don't laugh, some social circles judge you on your toys)
If your intent is to get more performance, I question whether software based RAID 0 is going to actually make your system faster, particularly if the CPU is already burdened with things like running the OS, doing compression, playback of whatever you are playing back
If you want to go faster consider SuperSpeed's disk caching products http://www.superspeed.com/ - in particular you can shadow an entire partition with a read write cache if you have enough RAM. If the dataset is too large for that they have a read write cache that is configurable also (but doesn't shadow cache the entire drive).
Want larger partitions, impress your friends, or RAID 1 for data protection against hardware failure (this is going to SUCK for throughput though, if software RAID1) then most of the large Dell laptops can put a second drive in the removable bay for a second drive for RAID.
Glonoinha
Re:What is your reason for wanting RAID? (Score:2)
You really should try it.
DELL Inspiron 8200 (Score:1, Informative)
beware of the expense -- its around $7K fully loaded with all options including multiple batteries which you will need if you use both hard drives RAIDed.
laptop drive limits (Score:4, Informative)
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:2, Informative)
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:2)
Out of interest, could you point them out?
I would have thought that disks in RAID systems are usually under increased load because RAID is often chosen for high load scenarios.
Kinda like saying red cars are involved in 20% more accidents than other coloured cars, therefore you have a 20% increased chance of having an accident if you drive a red car. Without considering that there are actually 20% more red cars on the road than any other colour.
PS, I just pulled the 20% figure out of the air to illustrate my point, I don't know what the real number is, just that there are more red cars on the road which can lead to ridiculously misinterpreted statistics and thoughts of voodoo and such.
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:2)
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:2)
Exactly.
If you don't need super performance, can't tolerate loss and can afford it, just mirror across some good drives.
SCSI drives seem to have higher MTBF's and longer warrantees, so after a bit of research amongst them you should be able to find some reliable drives.
If you need performance and cannot tolerate loss, RAID5 or RAID0+1 could be good for you.
But regardless of your disk system choices, choose a backup method that has a reliable restore feature. ; )
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:1)
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:2)
You could setup a "work" partition set to be RAID0 for fast processing of large files (video data conversion, for example), while the rest of the partitions are RAID1 for protection from a failure.
With software RAID, it's not an either/or situation.
Re:laptop drive limits (Score:1)
Faster, not more... (Score:2)
Re:Faster, not more... (Score:1)
(I know it's a joke, but in theory, it would be slow)
SCSI (Score:2, Interesting)
For a modern multi-tasking operating system like Linux or BSD, SCSI is a better answer than RAID. I've always found interactive use much better than with IDE, even than the newer ATA-100 and ATA-133 drives. IBM used to make RS/6000s with 2.5" SCSI drives and titanium cases. There were really sweet!
Ready for liftoff? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Faster, not more... (Score:2)
Re:Toshiba notebooks (Score:1)
Why? (Score:1)
Actually... (Score:2)
Depending on how you configure it, some Thinkpads can take two IDE drives. But I suspect your best bet is to get a pair of 3.5" drives in an external case and either hook up via FireWire or SCSI. I doubt that 2.5" IDE drives will take well to RAID 0.
Re:Actually... (Score:1)
Dell? (Score:1)
Look at the Eurocom 8880 (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.eurocom.ca/products/showroom/specs88
Has the capability for two cdroms/dvd-roms/etc at once.
15.7" screen as well.
No mention of weight, I suspect you don't wanna know.
Eurocom has always been a little bit ahead of everyone else on getting things out
I believe the TV tuner option replaces one of the media bays though
4.9kg/10.8lbs (Score:2)
Re:Look at the Eurocom 8880 (Score:1)
FireWire Portable RAID Array (Score:1)
FireWire and RAID (Score:1)
Maybe in the near future, we will see Serial ATA RAID controllers utilizing a PC Card slot that supports say two drives in either RAID 0 or RAID 1, that would connect to drives and powered by either a battery or an external power source.
Software RAID under Windows may not be the most optimal solution due to it's processor overhead, but it's still a somewhat viable option.
dell laptops (Score:1)
Not the unix way (Score:4, Interesting)
Sorry, but I gotta complain about your definition of desktop replacement. I want a desktop replacement laptop because I can take it to class and meetings. I love taking notes on my laptop for 8 hours without plugging in. Meeting minutes should be sent out within 1 minute of the meeting ending. When someone is in a meeting they should be able to get at the unexpected data they need that is on their desk, without leaving the room (that is the data is on the computer, so any computer can access it), not run back to their desk to price off a hard copy. Sure the batteries are a UPS, but if that is all you use your laptop for, a desktop with a UPS is cheaper and has a better keyboard, and monitor.
When I need more power than is on my laptop, then I ssh over to one of our CPU servers (at my last job we had a couple machines set up for this), and display my apps back to the laptop.
Laptop users should not have a big harddrive. They should have enough room for the OS, a few apps that they run on the road, and a copy of the documents they use often. Note I said copy, the master copy of these documents should be someplace that is always backed up, the laptop just has a copy for quick work until it can be synced with the master (two way sync). Other than that, long battery life, weight (the mass of even a heavey laptop is not enough to make a difference in gravity humans can stand, so weight is the critical), screen, keyboard, and interfaces are key.
Remember laptops are stolen; droped and broke; and forgotten far too often to have the master copy of anything. They should be easially replaceable. Too expensive to be disposable, but too fragile to depend on any one.
When you lock yourself into the desk is where I work, you miss the power that a laptop gives you. Get a laptop that you can use anywhere, wireless networking in the office (warning, security issues need to be addressed here), with a battery that is worth something. Suddenly the laptop goes from an expensive toy that to impress people to a useful tool that does things you couldn't get done otherwise.
Re:Not the unix way (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Not the unix way (Score:2)
Yep, a IBM thinkpad 390. It got just over 4 hours from a battery, and I had two. I only used the cdrom drive once in the year I had it, so removing the CD/floppy for a second battery was a good trade off to me. I was also careful to avoid using anything that took power, all the computing was done on the backroom cpu servers, and this was just a display.
Re:Not the unix way (Score:1)
Even a subnotebook would struggle to stay up for 8 hours on standard batteries though - and the larger battery packs tend to cost quite a bit more.
On the other hand, the original poster was slightly mixing up his terms too. It's really a desktop replacement *portable*, not *laptop*. Even my friend's slim 12.1" Vaio gets really rather warm - would not want it in my laps for too long!
Michel
Cheaper option (Score:3, Informative)
You could use any of the black line, but the Pismos often had 500MHz G3's.
Huh? (Score:4, Interesting)
Can someone explain to me what a "meta device" is? And, can some explain to me what happens when you get a plurality of "meta devices?" I mean, what the hell is this guy blathering about?
I'm sure other people are going to point out that RAID probably isn't the solution to the problem you think you're having. It's like hoping that forged connecting rods and pistons are going to make your Dodge Neon into a sports car. By itself, it's not going to do what you seem to hope it will do.
Anyhow, if you want a good, decent, fast notebook get yourself and Apple.
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
The only reason I think anyone would want raid on a laptop would be for raid-1, where the two disks are redundant copies of each other. Even that would be a stretch.
I think if they want speed in a notebook, they should just put in one faster drive instead of striping.
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
It depends. If you have a perfect setup, transfer speeds are, of course, better. However, statistically seek times are going to be worse, because for any seek both drives need to seek, and they'll never get to the data at exactly the same time.
But there is no guarantee that any random laptop with two or more hard drives is going to be a "perfect" setup. Who's to say that the controller and the drivers are going to be able to send commands to both drives simultaneously, and recieve data from both drives simultaneously? Given the strange and non-standard stuff wandering around on a lot of laptops, I wouldn't be suprised at all if software "RAID" striping ended up being crazy slow.
I also want to point out that although striping has recently been given the cute nickname "RAID 0", it really isn't RAID at all. I shouldn't be too suprised if the fellow who originally posted this meant striping, because he seems totally unclear of the meaning of even normal english terms like "meta." He doesn't seem any more confused than most of the clueless wanks who get selected byt the editors for "Ask Slashdot" columns, though...
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
I used the term meta device, because that's how Linux uses the term for it's software RAID, which is what I'm interested in using. Physical devices are combined into meta devices (/dev/md0,
In RAID0 both drives are seeking, but for different data. There's no requirement that the drives be synchronized in any way. Once the first buffer arrives to satisfy the request, the the application is dispatchable. Synchronized spindles were a technology that was used at one point, but the last I heard about it was about 15 years ago. FTR (full track read) in the drive firmware and similar competing optimizations eliminated the need for synchronization and the associated RPS (rotational position sensing), and RPS-miss condition you're describing.
In RAID1, either device can satisfy a read, so read processing is slightly faster. Both devices have to acknowledge a write, which does reduce performance slightly, for the increased reliability.
Re:Huh? (Score:2)
"meta device" linux or
metadevice linux
The source says "multiple device", so you're right; I'll use the correct terminology going forward. Thanks for pointing that out!
Re:Huh? (Score:1)
Side point (Score:3, Informative)
That said, I'm not so sure you want to buy anything with onboard RAID. Perhaps you should look at a speedy Firewire drive.
Re:Side point (Score:2)
Re:Side point (Score:1)
Easily done (Score:1, Informative)
http://www6.tomshardware.com/storage/02
http://www6.tomshardware.com/howto/01q
About "macdaddy" clockwork spike. I would suspect the Promise driver is the problem. Try disabling the RAID controller and run the Win2k software RAID instead.
They are smaller and unreliable because... (Score:1)
Also, on reliability, you have to realise how much torture these little drives go through. They are banged around in your laptop case/backpack and moved while spinning. To keep it reliable, the manufacturer of my laptop drive says to only use the laptop on a stable flat surface (unmoving, not legs or anything like that) and to NEVER move the laptop when it is on. Your desktop drive never gets moved while on (well, the normal person never moves it), and is very rarely, if all, banged around (occasional lan party). In order to keep the angular momentum from being too great when they are moved, so they don't really wear out bearing and whatnot fast and to save battery power, they are made to spin much slower. A 10000 RPM hard drive wouldn't last nearly as long as a slower one, unless you never picked up your computer while it was on, or banged it around (just don't move it and it will most likely last as long as desktop drive, maybe even longer).
Also, fluid bearings are getting very popular with
the newer drives. This helps to keep them from damaging themselves when they are banged around when off.
Why they don't use raid, I realy don't know. Most laptops support multiple hard drives (Toshiba), but most of the time they are removable. If you add another hard drive, where will you put it? If you have ever opened one of the newer (or even fairly old) laptops up, you will realise how crammed everything is. They are fitting a whole computer in the size of a keyboard. Adding another permanent hard drive, at least on mine, would require it to be quite a bit bigger (in terms of laptop size) because they would have to add room the size of the hard drive, plus some space for brackets. That would be about 2/5 an inch thicker. They could stack them without having to add much more room, but then you will have overheating, and once again, reliability problems.
And, IMHO, these are what they claim to be, desktop replacements, not server replacements. Why would you really need a SCSI or RAID configuration? The time you will save loading, compared to a standard desktop hard drive might only add up to tens of hours a year. To me, thats not worth the *reliability* or price, except for the coolness factor...heheh
They are just adding good cooling techniques (watercooled) that would allow for more compact cramming of parts. So now they don't have an excuse...
If you want something that will last, buy a toughbook! These things are garanteed to not break if dropped onto cement from arms length. But they are big and heavy and ugly as hell.