digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Put a RAID 0 in your MacBook, PowerBook, or MacBook Pr

macenstein.com — If that 60GB-200GB drive that came with your Mac laptop just isn ’t cutting it these days...here's a cool solution by outfitting your MacBook Pro with a RAID 0 setup using two 320GB 5400 rpm drives like Eric Cheng did.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jmechy, on 10/12/2007, -33/+1site dead at 18 diggs? Lame.
    • GawtMilk, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The site's not dead at 81 diggs. Check your connection.

      ---

      Is setting up RAID the same on a Mac tower (like a G5) as it is on a PC? I told a friend I'd set up RAID, but they never said they had a Mac. I've got the RAID controller and the hard drives, but is there any other component I need?
    • zybch, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Site isn't dead (100+ diggs), but I'm burying it thanks to the spam!!

      However, doesn't anyone think its EXTREMELY dangerous to use a striped RAID in a portable (read 'dropable') computer? One drive fails and you loose everything!
    • daven1986, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3yeah but if you back it up every week or so then it is certainly worth the increase in speed
    • 187lennon, on 10/12/2007, -2/+18Is misusing "loose" and "lose" part of leetspeak now? Or do people posting on Digg no longer know the difference between the two words? This isn't meant as sarcasm, but it seems that whenever I see one of those words, it is in the other's place.

      Also, how do you quote an earlier comment? I spent tens of seconds searching google, but I didn't see it.
    • drgruney, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16@187lennon
      "Also, how do you quote an earlier comment? I spent tens of seconds searching google, but I didn't see it."

      Copy, Paste friend.

      Looser.

      /yes I meant that as a joke on multiple levels
    • 187lennon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yeah, now I realize that I'm thinking of the way people quote on reddit (they have that blue bar to the left).
  • themuffinman, on 10/12/2007, -3/+25I'd like to get my hands on them 320 gig 2.5" drives.
    • Birdoftruth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+16Sweet, now all I need is a laptop
    • jamend, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19It's actually 2x160 GB drives. Macenstein got it wrong.
  • VictorA, on 10/12/2007, -3/+28This is a dup of the following digg submission:

    http://digg.com/apple/320GB_striped_RAID_in_a_MacBook_Pro

    that points directly to the original artcile from Eric Cheng that is the primary source for this blog post.
  • clesch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8decent idea, but I wouldn't sacrifice my optical drive for it.
    I'd rather get the aftermarket drop-in BR-drive plus one 200 GB 7200 rpm 2.5" drive instead of that solution, despite the price.

    and:
    "The replacement drive chassis doesn’t have the same clip receptacles that the SuperDrive chassis has, so the keyboard top on my Macbook Pro no longer sits exactly flush on the right side. There’s probably a 1mm gap, which isn’t enough to really bother me."
    • starf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Agreed. It sounded awesome right up until I found out that it replaced my optical drive.
    • sv650touring, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1No built-in optical drive isn't a problem for some people (my main use is just burning stuff for other people, and old game consoles). But, the keyboard not fitting correctly on such an expensive piece of hardware would KILL me inside.

      This is definitely something that would appeal to a small minority.

      In other news, I yanked the optical drive out of my old G3 iMac, just to improve the cooling of the 7200RPM drive I installed in it.
  • djh816, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Animated icon.ico oh my! (I think that animated icon was more interesting than the actual article)
  • Directrix1, on 10/12/2007, -2/+14People, for your own good, don't do RAID 0. This just doubles your chances of unrecoverable failure compared to one drive.
    • marcan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Or you could do it the smart way and partition your hard drives to form several independent RAID arrays, and use each array for different types of data.

      I have three hard drives in my desktop. There's a small RAID 1 to hold boot information, which was chosen because RAID 1 is backwards-compatible (my motherboard can read my RAID1 partitions to boot, as they look the same as a regular partition, except for the small RAID information sector at the end, which is ignored). This means that I can plug in the hard drives in any sequence to my motherboard, and it doesn't matter which one it boots from (the OS takes care of knowing which is which later on). Then, I use RAID 5 for my main storage, OS, and all my data (I have many years of work here - it's not critical, but I'd hate to lose it). I also have a smaller RAID 0 set up, which I use for the system temporary storage (speeds up compile times, etc). Swap space is striped using the native Linux striping abilities, so it's not technically using a RAID driver, but it's comparable to RAID 0. Lastly, I have a fourth hard drive for bulk data storage, such as movies. I also use LVM on top of everything else, so I can have several logical partitions on top of the RAID systems and shuffle data and free space around.

      In my case I don't use a whole lot of RAID 0, but it's certainly a good choice for, say, your OS and applications, if your set-up isn't heavily customized, or you keep backups. And for video applications and the like, where hard drive throughput is a bottleneck.
    • Firehed, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Wait, you partition drives and put each partition into a different RAID array? I hope you never do any transferring between logical drives, since it'll just rape performance all around. In any case, the performance gain from RAID is so minimal in typical use (that's to say, anything but raw HD video capture) that it's just asking for problems.

      But whatever, your call. I just keep an external backup drive... that way in case my file system ***** up, I don't have two identical drives full of useless crap.
  • felch, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7There is little reason you should ever, EVER do a RAID0. Unless you like twice the chances of losing your data.
  • Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12What an idiot.
    5400rpm drives are going to be slower, the whole point of RAID 0 is for pure speed, so this doesn't deliver it.
    Secondly, you're doubling your chance of failure.
    Thirdly he's giving up an optical drive for it.
    Fourthly, RAID 0 just plain gives no real benefits.

    If he wanted more space he should've at least used JBOD, if he wants speed, then RAID 5 is where he should start, and in that case a full desktop is required and probably a hardware card.
    • marcan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4You never need a hardware card for RAID. Unless you actually have special requirements (e.g. with a server or a SAN), you can do software RAID and it will work as well if not better for desktop applications. Nowadays, cheap RAID cards and integrated RAID solutions are just software RAID anyway - the motherboard emulates it for boot, and the OS requires drivers which do the real work. The cards themselves are glorified ATA/SATA cards.
    • Ramble, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I know, but with RAID 5 a hardware card is kinda needed for max performance.
    • philz, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1marcan,

      I've built my server at home with 8 disks in a RAID5 - you notice the speed difference for example when unpacking a large file - and I dont trust all my data to a software raid controller (yes I do backups).

    • jamend, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4There are 2 ways RAID can help with performance: IOPS and throughput. Using 5400 RPM drives will suck for latency and IOPS but average throughput will still ~double with RAID 0. IOPS are important for servers, but for desktops/content-creating workstations, throughput is what counts. RAID 5 is not really meant for performance (IOPS aside) but rather redundancy. It only breaks even on throughput at about 5+ drives, and RAID 5 isn't possible with 2 drives anyways.

      Also, hardware cards are only good for lowering CPU utilization, but it's about as practical as having network and sound cards that offload the processing.

      And for anyone crying about how RAID 0 is dangerous... please grow some balls. Most people don't have more personal (i.e. not redownloadable) content that can fit on a few DVDs or their iPod anyways.
  • venicerocco, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Sweet. Now I can rip all theose DVDs I've been meaning to!

    Oh, wait...
  • jpirkey, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6@zybch
    "However, doesn't anyone think its EXTREMELY dangerous to use a striped RAID in a portable (read 'dropable') computer? One drive fails and you loose everything!"

    I would consider it if they were flash drives. However, with standard drives that contain movable parts, I agree with you completely.
    • snuffulupagus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2I've had a RAID 0 array in my laptop for almost 3 years now and hasn't crashed yet :) In fact, my third BACKUP drive is the one that crashed. I'm thinking of replacing the drives soon though, because I have the feeling one of them is starting to go bad (random bluescreens...)
  • whakojacko, on 10/12/2007, -6/+1am I the only one who finds it ironic that because Apple likes to keep macbook pros "clean", users must resort to 3rd-party devices that require taking apart your laptop to very poorly replicate what many other laptops have been doing for a while?
    On other note, RAID 0 in a laptop: just WHY?
    • Izacus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1Why NOT? Laptop drives are mostly slow anyway, plus if you have a decent backup set up (mine backs up everything important at least once per day over FTP) you have nothing to fear.
  • stubear, on 10/12/2007, -4/+2You could also get a Dell XPS M2010 and get the benefits of having 2 hard drives and a CD/DVD-R. If you think of it as a portable workstation instead of a laptop you're much better off as well. Too bad it's such a pain in the ass to get OSX running on it.
    • zioxide, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Too bad that's one of the ugliest computers I've ever seen.
  • sghost, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3While the performance increase of RAID 0 is tempting for your OS drive, I know of several people that did this only to find that unexpected power outages (storms, or any loss of power) without a battery backup can EASILY corrupt your OS. I'm sure this could also depend on how decent your RAID controller is at handling such scenarios.
  • macbookpromat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I see 2 problems with this idea:

    It's gonna cut down on battery life, like mentioned in the article, and if you have a MacBook Pro, that's a huge issue.

    It's probably going to cause heat issues. I don't know for you other MacBook Pro owners, but my left palm rest is hotter than the other one, and a slight rise in temperature could only mean that the fans will be working more.
  • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Raid 0 doesn't improve performance. It's a gimick. It appears to do so in synthetic benchmarks but in real world tests it is no faster than a single drive.
    If you don't believe me just look up REAL WORLD benchmarks for yourself.
  • BOFH2, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1or you could just buy an alienware. yes they may cost more but you get more computer for the price.
    • archer75, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Build your own, save money and get more performance.
    • yugiohdan6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1but then you don't get mac os x... at least not legally...
  • bootle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anything like this for an iBook G4? I went with a basic CD-ROM to save money, and that thing is next to useless these days. A second HD would be much handier...
  • deadprez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sets you back a bit, but worthy alternative if your mac laptop *doesn’t need complete mobility*:

    QBOX-P + Sil3112 chipset expresscard = raid0 and/or 1 combos with up to four sata hard drives running at full speed with only one esata external cable. The BYTECC expresscard i got for like 30 bucks off newegg and installed drivers from chipset manufacturer website to make work with osx. The qbox-p will set you back ~300 usd which is most costly part. Hopefully someone will design a competitor external case and lower that price but still worth it in my book.

    Costs:
    approx $1300 for an additional 3.0 TB raid0
    approx $500 for an additional 800 GB raid0 which can be expanded later
  • alansky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think most users would be much better off simply adding a portable 160GB external firewire drive, which costs less than half the price of the OptiBay hard drive kit, doesn't mess with the guts of your machine or void the warranty, and lets you keep your optical drive. For those who absolutely must have truckloads of storage space on the road, you can buy a 750GB 3.5-inch firewire drive in a fairly portable enclosure for the price of the OptiBay upgrade. Conversation piece? Definitely. Practical upgrade? I dunno.
  • M0b1u5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2As I've told everyone repeatedly, you'd be a ***** moron to run a RAID 0 system without a set of drives in RAID 1 as backup. Can you say, "Less than half as reliable as 1 disk" and "All Data Lost" and "RAID setup unusable on any other system"?

    Honestly, HDDs are a real bottleneck in a laptop, but the answer is flash memory - not RAID 0!
  • MikeZ, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12008 MacBook Pro

    15" (movie 1080p HD mode)
    2.66Ghz Quad Core
    4GB Memory
    2x 300GB = 600GB HD
    ATi Radeon 1GB (HD Monitor out) - HDMI
    3 USB Ports
    2 FireWires
    Dual FireWire 800
    Digital Audio out w/Doby Surround Sound 7.1 and Handset Surround Sound Card
    Better Sounding Stereo Speakers
    External Moblie HD Blue-ray Drive w/DVD up-scaling and HD DVD Playback
    Mac OS X Leopard 10.5
    Front Row 2.0
    GSM Internet
    Wi-fi/ and super Wi-fi 802.11n
    Bluetooth 3.0
    iLife 08
    PCI Express slot






  • CokeBear, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why not just buy a ready made FireWire 800 powered 320GB RAID 0 FireWire Powered "Little Big Disk" from LaCie?

    http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=10731
    • VictorA, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@ CokeBear

      I think the idea is that the RAID is built-in to the MacBook Pro without having to drag around external disk just to boot the machine.
  • BOFH2, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Dugg down for the truth? I looked at getting a macbook but when I went to buy a new laptop and it just did not have the capabilities the M9700 did.

    @archer75 - Build your own, save money and get more performance. - build your own notebook? I would like to and have been looking for a year. Maybe I am looking in the wrong place.
  • silencerider151, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Just as a warning, if you use RAID 0 on your drives, you cannot make partitions. So goodbye bootcamp.
  • afssanders, on 04/18/2008, -0/+0I would like to know how you guys are going to recover your data from your drive once they fail. Do you really believe that your safer with one drive? Do you drive a car on one wheel? Does it really increase you chance of lost data having two drives? It's not like your playing cards and there's only 4 aces in the deck or lets say you bought 2 brand new MBP's. Do you have an increased chance of one them breaking? You're buying hardware and it should work for years. At least that's what I get out of my drives.
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.