Reply
Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

Hello, I'm running a RAID 0 M225 64Gig since Sept 2009 (Win7 x64)

I guess the firmware is one of the first version (1571 ?), never upgraded since I bought them.

 

I am wondering if I need to break the array and upgrade separately each drive.

 

Or

 

upgrade within the RAID, expecting to keep all my datas.

 

I haven't found I clear answer in the previous posts.

 

Thank you for answer of people who DID really the operation.

 

Regards

 

 

Pierre

Memory Leak Geek
alanrob13
Posts: 9
Registered: 01-26-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

I broke my array, upgraded each drive and the re-created the array - keeping the data intact.

 

No regrets, speed increase all round.

 

Alan

Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

Thanks Alan,

 

I appreciated that breaking the array and upgrade does not need a restore.

 

I'll let you know.

 

Cheers

Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

Alan,

 

Both option in the Intel Matrix Storage warn that all data will ne destroyed.

 (delete array | delete partition)

Which options did you choose to avoid that.. ?

 

I'm running on ICH9 (P35-DS4)

 

Thank you

Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

Well, I didn't touch the array.

 

Just disabled the RAIDoption in the BIOS.

Then updated each drive (took 1 sec for each !)

 

Then enabled the RAIDoption in BIOS and restarted.

 

The jump in performances is quite incredible!

Hope this will last for long..

 

See the bench, before and after:

 

2010-02-07_111312.png

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2010-02-07_213435.png

Memory Leak Geek
alanrob13
Posts: 9
Registered: 01-26-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

:smileyvery-happy: They are pretty good aren't they? Wish I could've afforded 256Gb drives for raiding (quicker speeds) but would've only noticed the differences when Benchmarking. Normal day use, 64Gb is good

 

Alan

Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

The perf have turned horrible (see new post)  quick after the bench.

That's impossible to open a session or do anything.

 

The HDD led is continously ON.

 

Looks like I have to break and reinstall.

Fortunetaly I have a fresh backup.

 

Anything like this on your system ?

Memory Leak Geek
alanrob13
Posts: 9
Registered: 01-26-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

[ Edited ]

Hi,

 

Must admt that I haven't had this on my system. Seems like GC is kicking in and cleaning the rubbish away but that should only happen at idle.

 

Seems like a Sanitary Erase is the way to go and then a restore, ensure that your partitions are aligned cause that can cause perfromance problems. 

 

Alan

Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

OK, I'll try that.

 

Hopefully a backup method instead of a clean install after Sanitary will be fine.

I do not plan to reinstal W7 from scratch.

 

I mean to install a new W7 on an external drive, break the RAID, Sanitarize, build the RAID, restore.

 

If it is still rubbish, I'll leave the RAID behind me...

Kilobyte Kid
Averell
Posts: 9
Registered: 02-07-2010
0

Re: M225 64Gig in RAID 0 -> break before upgrade to 1916 ???

Back to normal.

Delete RAIS, Broke Array, build Array, Format (There was some reminicent data causing problems), Broke Array again, Sanitarize, build Array, then restore with Acronis.

 

2010-02-08_230350.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I set the Stripe Size to 128K, I remember having better read performances with 64K.

 

Anyway, I'm leaving the configuration as it is.

 

Thanks Alan for your messages.

 

I hope GC is a long run improvement !