Raid controller - when to get?

[Dutch]

I'm planning a media server build in the near future and one of the big questions I have revolves around Raid and Raid controllers.

For my first iteration, I'm planning on using Windows Home Server with 3 1TB drives (would like to expand to 6 drives).

I'm planning on using the onboard Raid of a P5Q Pro I already have and want to set up Raid 5.

If I want to stay between the 3-6 drive range, is it unnecessary to get a Raid controller?

 

[Computurd]

I dont think that a home server would even require a raid card, the bandwidth from your drives wil be throttled by the ethernet connection, also you can have your files automatically duplicated on multiple drives

 

[DirtyDells]

http://www.fearthecowboy.com/post/Windows-Home-Servers-Drive-Extender-vs-RAID.aspx

You do not need raid for WHS. WHS uses drive extender. You have the main boot drive that uses about 20gb and then it is partitioned for just OS. The rest is for storage. Then you just add drives from there and WHS will format them and combine them together or make a drive as backup.

 

[Dangman]

If I want to stay between the 3-6 drive range, is it unnecessary to get a Raid controller?

Whether or not its necessary depends on whats your acceptance level is for the performance of the server. The oboard RAID controller uses the PC's CPU to do all of the parity calculations which means that you will take a performance hit as well as constant CPU usage depending on the size of the array and CPU.

For many, when coupled with a fast enough CPU and somewhat limited and/or light usage (file serving, web servering, etc), onboard RAID 5 is enough. However for those that tends to use their servers for many and/or heavy uses at the same time (file serving, database, virtualization, video encoding, etc), a dedicated RAID controller will be a good buy.

For WHS, KISS. Don't bother a RAID 5 setup.

 

[[LYL]Homer]

Here is the evolution path for many WHS users as I see it.

1. Set up WHS on older hardware using onboard SATA ports for a couple of drives.
2. Upgrade cpu & motherboard with more SATA ports, plug a few more drives in.
3. Add in a (non-RAID) Supermicro AOC-SAT2-MV8 for eight more SATA ports (fits in regular PCI slot) and cram in more drives in 5-in-3 cages.
4. Upgrade case to a Norco RPC-4020 or RPC-4220 with 20 drive bays.
5. Add in another Supermicro card and more drives as required.
6. Get really serious and build multiple Norco setups or add drives via SAS expanders.

I've done 1-3 and am on the verge of step 4.

 

[oplin]

That sounds like an accurate evolution path. I'm about to hit up the Norco case pretty soon i think, or upgrade drives from 500 gigs to 1.5tb's, but that'll only go so far so thinking just jump on the norco case, just would like to get a rack for it.

 

[keenan]

Whether or not its necessary depends on whats your acceptance level is for the performance of the server. The oboard RAID controller uses the PC's CPU to do all of the parity calculations which means that you will take a performance hit as well as constant CPU usage depending on the size of the array and CPU.

IME software RAID5/RAID6 can be faster than, or is at least on a level playing field with hardware RAID, and if it's a dedicated file server, who cares how much CPU it uses. Onboard RAID sucks because the drivers suck, not because there's a problem with software RAID. I wouldn't use it though for that reason, either go to a proper hardware RAID, proper software RAID or forget RAID entirely.