> If you care for reability, you should probably end up in using some sort
> of hardware array instead. For many persons linux raid works reliable and
> very fine. Also does LVD-SCSI in it's U2W incarnation which is also way
> faster than simple FAST-SCSI-WIDE (what in fact is the most you can get
> from vanilla SCSI-2).
> So I can't get your point.
Well, unfortunately we're using IDE drives, each connected to an IDE/SCSI
adapter, which has an ide interface on one side and a scsi-2 interface on
the other. As we're on something of a budget, this is what we have to work
with if we're going for storage volume.
> > Also, the percentage till completion reported in
> > /proc/mdstat never rose above 12% - it would always drop back to 0%.
>
> Was there activity on the array?
No, it wasn't even mounted.
> > the ETA steadily fell, and now it claims it's done... is it really synced?
>
> If there's no activity on the disks, it is done.
> Simply test by copying something onto it, sync, work otherwise so the
> kernel buffers get flushed and read this file. Compare the two. If they
> are equal, there's no problem. If not...
"work otherwise"? I can't parse this sentance, sorry.
