From: "Matthew D. Lammers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I would like some input on the following hardware choices:
3 Adaptec 2940UW SCSI-III controllers.
- One for root (/) which will include all logging
- One for mounting just alt.binaries.*
Hi,
I have a machine with an ICP-Vortex controller, and I have previously noticed
people from ICP posting to this list, so I wonder if someone with some experience
might see fit to shed some light on this. The machine in question has a GDT
6537 controller, and has 4 disks on this. It also has an
I think you're using the latest 2.0.35-2 kernel source/headers, use the
original 2.0.35 kernel/headers. Unfortunately this doesn't have the
latest patches (patch-2.0.35.gz) for for the entire kernel.
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It seems like Red Hat 5.1's kernel (at least,
From: "Stephen Costaras" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RAID of any level is NOT to be considered a 'backup' method.
There are no assurances built into raid for data reliability.
(ie. A program which writes corrupted data, a user who types
Identical problem with TAPE!! In fact it's even worse
RAID of any level is NOT to be considered a 'backup' method.
There are no assurances built into raid for data reliability.
(ie. A program which writes corrupted data, a user who types
an rm -rf command in a wrong directory), et al. RAID only
protects you against a disk failure. Nothing more.
T
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> It seems like Red Hat 5.1's kernel (at least, the updated one I have)
> already contains older RAID patches; I get nearly-endless:
>
> /usr/src/linux/include/linux/modules/md.ver:13: warning: `md_update_sb' redefined
> /usr/src/linux/include/linux/m
Hi there!
Sorry if you got this message twice, but it didn't show up on the list the
first time...
I've got a question about RAID. (I'm using the raid0145-19981005-C-2.0.35
patch and the raidtools-19981005-B-0.90.)
Is there a way to make the raid driver spit out less information at
boot-up/ini
In an effort to keep performance to a maximum, I am preparing to migrate a
news server to RAID-0. It is currently Linux (Slack 3.5), and running
well, so I believe the boost to disk striping will be a benefit, no matter
how small.
I would like some input on the following hardware choices:
Hi there, the subject line may be somewhat misleading - my question is
more to do with quota's than RAID. Perhaps someone can help me anyway...
Where I am working we are giving design students large amount of disk
space for keeping digital video and other monstrous files. These
students can be ver
I've enjoyed reading the rapid pace of RAID advancement in this list.
I recently nearly convinced a client to utilize a RAID5 setup for a
backup system (rather than a multi-tape system or a bigger
tape). I nearly had it in, until the question of fire survivability
came up
I dislike tap
It seems like Red Hat 5.1's kernel (at least, the updated one I have)
already contains older RAID patches; I get nearly-endless:
/usr/src/linux/include/linux/modules/md.ver:13: warning: `md_update_sb' redefined
/usr/src/linux/include/linux/modules/ksyms.ver:224: warning: this is the location of
And lo, Gadi Oxman saith unto me:
>
> On Tue, 13 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > I've been running raid-0 and linear modes on a disk array for some time. This
> > works really well! (I guess you allready knew :)
> >
> > Now, I moved the disks (six quantum fireball 6
On Wed, 14 Oct 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 13, 1998 at 10:01:43PM +0300, Gadi Oxman wrote:
> ...
> > Ouch.. 100KB/sec on block writes is indeed unusable; strange, as we
> > usually score very well on bonnie's block-writes.
> >
> > Does it happen consistently on each run? Does one
On Tue, Oct 13, 1998 at 10:01:43PM +0300, Gadi Oxman wrote:
...
> Ouch.. 100KB/sec on block writes is indeed unusable; strange, as we
> usually score very well on bonnie's block-writes.
>
> Does it happen consistently on each run? Does one of the drives in the
> RAID array also contains an active
On Tue, 13 Oct 1998, Jeremy Hansen wrote:
> I'm also curious as to why such old docs are still included with the
> raidtool distro. They're rather pointless since nothing seems to take
> that type of mold any longer. Like what said below, a few emails from
> this list pretty much makes the old
15 matches
Mail list logo
