Windows 10 Confused - Want to set up storage space - All look like 1 drive

[Roger Ewing]

An answer to this question may clear up my confusion: Can the C: drive be part of a pool, having all drives (including the c: drive) look like 1 drive? If so, how do I do that? I created a storage space, but it made me set it up as drive D:, and I see no way to combine it with C:.

To clarify, I'm trying to create a parity type of setup (raid 5 if you prefer to call it), and I want to have all 5 drives in the system, which would then include the boot drive, participating in that. And having done that would like it to be 1 drive letter.

What I have been able to do is install Windows 10, then create a storage space pool of 4 drives, being a D: drive. This leaves the C: / Windows boot drive out of the protection scheme. Would also like to have the clarity of just 1 drive.

Any fog removal is appreciated.

 

[bochane]

I don't know, but as I understood it, you will need an hardware raid controller, because the raid must be functional at the time you start booting.

 

[Roger Ewing]

Not so sure.. Storage spaces do not implement via the hardward. My MB does support raid, but I"m not really doing hardware based raid. BUT...maybe the hardware based raid via controllers, etc, is what is required to do what I want.

I'm wondering if maybe I can do something with dynamic volumes to accomplish what I want.

 

[bochane]

The problem is that you need a functional OS for software implementations, but you don't have that on the moment you start that that OS.
So startting the OS on C: and the Raid on D: sounds normal to me. I never heard of some part of a disk used for installing the OS being not in the raid, while the remaing part of the same disk is part of the raid. As I understood this in not possible, all disks should be of equal size.

On the other hand raid through your MB may give you the option of having the OS in the raid.

But why would you want it? Raid 5 is not fast, it would slow down your OS, think of a page file in the raid - it is not fast it is reliable.

 

[Roger Ewing]

The problem is that you need a functional OS for software implementations, but you don't have that on the moment you start that that OS.
So startting the OS on C: and the Raid on D: sounds normal to me. I never heard of some part of a disk used for installing the OS being not in the raid, while the remaing part of the same disk is part of the raid. As I understood this in not possible, all disks should be of equal size.

On the other hand raid through your MB may give you the option of having the OS in the raid.

But why would you want it? Raid 5 is not fast, it would slow down your OS, think of a page file in the raid - it is reliable.

This is not a server serving files to a bunch of users. For the most part, it is a media server, holding movies, music etc. I do keep some personal files, but the overall speed for accessing those is not an issue. Raid 5 gives redundancy with less cost in disk space. Given what I'm storing and my usage that is a much wiser choice over other raid choices.

I guess I'll go ahead and get a small drive to run the OS< and move the TB drive that is there now to have the space available in the storage pool.

 

[Neemobeer]

I'd go with a hardware raid card and setup either a RAID 10 or RAID 50 if you can afford the drives. Both will still have redundancy and most of the speed improvements from being RAID 0.