Sorry murman I didn't see that about Raid 0. It makes no difference to partitioning but it does make a difference to storage capacity and vulnerability.
There are a number of Raid formats, (definitions and brief explanations at Wikipedia), but for most purposes the two most common are Raid 0 and Raid 1
Raid 0, is two disks where data is written to, and read from, alternate disks. So if you have a file that is 2 bytes big, 1 byte will be saved on the first disk, and the 2nd byte will be saved on the 2nd disk. This means faster writing to and faster reading from the hard disk. The two disks are treated as one disk. Faster, but if one disk fails, you lose everything!
Raid 1, is two disks where each time data is written to the disk, it is written to both disks at the same time. This is slower than Raid 0, (but no slower than normal single disks), but it has an important feature. If one disk fails, you lose nothing. The Disk Operating System can still work just off the one disk. (This assumes the disk failure is not catastrophic, eg breaking up and damaging the other disk). The two disks are still treated as one, but they back each other up.
So if you are having two 75GB drives in Raid 0 format, you are not getting 150GB of storage. You are only getting 75GB of storage. The same applies to Raid 1 but that doesn't apply to your proposed set up.
Be careful then. If you need more than 75GB hard disk storage, you will need larger capacity hard disks if you are sticking with Raid, or you could add an additional internal drive, non-raid, for storage.
I use Raid 0 myself, and I am beginning to worry. My system is over 4 years old now, and the likelihood of disk failure grows. I use an external hard disk backup, and I have all my important files backed up to CD and DVD.
Mark