FTK 3.1 Raid 0 vs single 10k rpm HDD
Will FTK 3.1 function with the Oracle DB installed on a single 10k rpm HDD or does it truly need to be installed on a Raid 0 array to work properly. My system specs are 12 GB ram, Vista 64 OS, intel i7 3.2Ghz with the OS on a 10k rpm hdd, and a separate drive for drive images and case files. Any advice is appreciated.
The DB will function on a single drive, although of course IO will be less than RAID. I started my testing out with it that way, then tested on a RAID0, then settled on a RAID10 for my production system build. AccessData's spec recommendations are here http//www.accessdata.com/downloads/media/FTK_3_SystemSpecificationsGuide.pdf
I advise against RAID0 simply because RAID0 multiplies your change of failure and contains no protection against such. Your Oracle DB gets a lot of usage and is the most likely point of failure.
Use solid state drive for DB, 256GB under $1000 or 512GB drives $2000 and they will outperform RAID, you will immediately see the difference.
I totally agree to ssd's, i have 2 ssd's in my box, 1 for os and software, the 2nd is for my database. My 3rd drive is a 1tb sata drive for working.
I have 8gigs memory, running windows 7 pro, also have the amd x6 1095 chip, total cost of the box $2,500.00cdn.
this machine smokes when working. ssd's are the best way to go, get the new ocz vertex2 drives, 270meg/writes and 280meg/reads, great drives.
my next additional will be a drobo for storing cases and working files.
I'm also all for SSD to install Oracle. However, do not choose any SSD!!
Go with a high quality drive. My pick is the Intel X25-M. That's what we've equipped all our analysis workstation and it works great. We have one machine with a Intel X25-E Extreme. It is blazing fast, but cost a real fortune…
From the testing I've done, if you go with a cheap SSD drive (the one I tried was a Transcend MLC 64 GB) you'll get about the same speed as a fast SATA drive.