On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 14:22, Robert Webb wrote:
>
>
> Dave Sherohman wrote:
[snip]
> yup, there IDE RAID controllers out there. Whether they help speed or
> not I don't know.
> I am actually running one that does only RAID 1 for redundancy for my
> firewall. Cannot
> afford to have that go down
hi ya robert
why not have two firewalls ???
( 2x pentium-90Mhz for example .. something cheap, but fast enough)
+-- fw1 --+
internet -> csu/dus -> hub -> + +--> hub -> your lan
+-- fw2 --+
when one goes down use the other ...
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 13:39, Dave Sherohman wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 12:07:22PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> > The problem with JBODs (just big ole disks, i.e. single disks)
>
> JBOD = Just a Bunch Of Disks, i.e., several drives operating
> independently. A JBOD can be organized into a RAI
Dave Sherohman wrote:
[snip]
Any sort of true hardware RAID setup (beware the hybrids, since this
doesn't apply to them) will interact with the rest of the system as a
single device. The question of whether to put the individual drives
on separate controllers or not doesn't apply, since the d
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 10:00:16AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote:
> So, the way I'm reading this, a RAID 5 stack w/ 5 20 GB hard drives
> provides improved access speed and reliability at the cost of slightly
> reduced storage.
Yep. Different RAID levels are basically different tradeoffs between
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 12:07:22PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
> The problem with JBODs (just big ole disks, i.e. single disks)
JBOD = Just a Bunch Of Disks, i.e., several drives operating
independently. A JBOD can be organized into a RAID, but doesn't have
to be.
> With RAID solutions, the read-w
On Mon, Jun 10, 2002 at 09:46:45AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote:
> So then, the primary advantages of RAID are access speed and data
> redundancy
The primary advantages of RAID are highly dependent on what flavor of
RAID you're using. RAID0 and RAID1, e.g., are practically the opposite
of each ot
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 08:46, Ian D. Stewart wrote:
> On 2002.06.10 03:35 Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> > On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:33, Alvin Oga wrote:
> >
> > > if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter
> > > if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping )
> >
> > No, it does matter. You
On 2002.06.10 05:48 Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 03:46, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> - and if the drives gonna fail... i say its more likely to die
> within the first 30 days ...
Yes. MTBF only measures how likely it is to fail during the middle of
its life.
A good number die early
On 2002.06.10 03:35 Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:33, Alvin Oga wrote:
> if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter
> if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping )
No, it does matter. You can expect at least one of four 20GB drives to
fail much sooner than one 80
On Mon, 2002-06-10 at 03:46, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> - and if the drives gonna fail... i say its more likely to die
> within the first 30 days ...
Yes. MTBF only measures how likely it is to fail during the middle of
its life.
A good number die early (defective) and late (worn out). Not many die
hi ya anthony
yes... good point on MTBF...
- and if the drives gonna fail... i say its more likely to die
within the first 30 days ... ( some disks more likely to die than
others irrespective of the MTBF and name-brands..
- i have a pile of "bad/flaky IBM disks" ...
about 1-
On Sun, 2002-06-09 at 20:33, Alvin Oga wrote:
> if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter
> if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping )
No, it does matter. You can expect at least one of four 20GB drives to
fail much sooner than one 80GB drive, assuming same MTBF numbers on all
driv
hi ya
fun stuff. it depends ...
if you have a nearly full 80GB disks ... it wont matter
if you have 1x 80GB or 4x 20GB( stripping )
- i rather worry about 1 large disk failure... than to worry about
which of the 4 small disks gonna die ... also makes 4x the mess
i
"Ian D. Stewart" wrote:
> As the size of IDE hard drives increase, what are the
> advantages/disadvantages of using a single large hard drive as opposed
> to a RAID stack (say, 80 GB hard drive vs. raid tower w/ 4 20 GB hard
> drives) ?
I'd say it all depends on the specs of hard drives. If you
"Alice M. Pinard" wrote:
> I don't see how I could do that the whole reason I have the hard drive
> on the Promise ultra is that it's a 60g hd and reportedly with even the
> most up to date bios available for my mb it will only see 32g
>
> wouldn't putting a hd that it can't see all of be a
Alice,
On my ASUS P5A/B board, the only way I could get the promise card's first drive
(hde) recognized as the drive to boot off of was to manually set the IDE hard
dives in the BIOS to none, even though I did indeed have hard drives installed
in those positions. Linux of course doesn't care so o
heh after reading more in that same section the "Other IDE chipset
configuration" section looks like its also worth a look.
On Sun, 9 Jun 2002 08:25:20 -0700
"robert jorgenson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Might wany to look into the "boot off-board chipset first support" feature in
> the kerne
Might wany to look into the "boot off-board chipset first support" feature in
the kernel, after reading the help it says it may help with problems of booting
ide devices in expansion cards before the bios. I dont know much of anything
about this but i was just reading through it after reading th
On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 09:35:05AM -0400, Ian D. Stewart wrote:
> As the size of IDE hard drives increase, what are the
> advantages/disadvantages of using a single large hard drive as opposed
> to a RAID stack
Well, that depends on what flavor of RAID you're talking about...
In general:
RAID
On 2002.06.08 22:33 Alice M. Pinard wrote:
As I'm continuing to try and troubleshoot a hd that doesn't seem to
want
to boot (promise ultra card, 60g hd) I just wanna doublecheck one
thing
Semi-OT
As the size of IDE hard drives increase, what are the
advantages/disadvantages of using a single
On Sun, 9 Jun 2002, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> hi ya alice
>
> yeah...you can ignore the "/dev/hde1 is not the first disk" noise maker..
>
> but, you have to confirm that you can boot from /dev/hde, /dev/hdf, ...
> - move that linux disk to /dev/hdd temporarily to
> see if it will boot
hi ya alice
yeah...you can ignore the "/dev/hde1 is not the first disk" noise maker..
but, you have to confirm that you can boot from /dev/hde, /dev/hdf, ...
- move that linux disk to /dev/hdd temporarily to
see if it will boot off hdd
- check your bios ... that you have hde li
On Sat, Jun 08, 2002 at 10:33:44PM -0400, Alice M. Pinard wrote:
> As I'm continuing to try and troubleshoot a hd that doesn't seem to want
> to boot (promise ultra card, 60g hd) I just wanna doublecheck one thing
>
>
> If I don't even get a LI or L or _something_ from lilo it's definitely
>
As I'm continuing to try and troubleshoot a hd that doesn't seem to want
to boot (promise ultra card, 60g hd) I just wanna doublecheck one thing
If I don't even get a LI or L or _something_ from lilo it's definitely
not a lilo problem and it's somewhere further up in the pipeline?
Or could t
25 matches
Mail list logo
