Disk array partitions overlap!?

1999-01-27 Thread Steve Frampton
Hello! I've just installed a Mylex DAC960 controller driving 4 SCSI 9 Gb drives into an Red Hat 5.2 Intel-based Linux (2.0.36) server. After I built a custom kernel with the DAC960 2.0.0 beta 4 driver (as found on the Dandelion Digital page), I was able to see my RAID array show up as /dev/rd/c0

Re: Disk array partitions overlap!?

1999-01-27 Thread Leonard N. Zubkoff
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 17:53:50 -0500 (EST) From: Steve Frampton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hello! I've just installed a Mylex DAC960 controller driving 4 SCSI 9 Gb drives into an Red Hat 5.2 Intel-based Linux (2.0.36) server. After I built a custom kernel with the DAC960 2.0.0 bet

Re: Disk array partitions overlap!?

1999-01-27 Thread Guest section DW
A FAQ. >From the Summary: If you have an old fdisk and it warns about ``overlapping'' partitions: ignore the warnings, or check using cfdisk that really all is well. >From the text: What is this nonsense you get from fdisk about `overlapping' partitions, when in fact nothing is wr

Re[2]: Bad read performance of RAID-0,1

1999-01-27 Thread Evgeny Stambulchik
Hello all, I've made some series of bonnie runs for RAID-0. You can look at the results at http://plasma-gate.weizmann.ac.il/~fnevgeny/tmp/raid0.gif. * The best block read performance (that's what I'm mainly interested in) is for 32k or 64k chunk sizes. * 32k seems also like a "magic" number

Endian-bug in raidtools (patch included)

1999-01-27 Thread Sverker Wiberg
The md ioctls expect their extra arguments to be unsigned longs (explicitly converted to kdev_t), while raidtools-0.50beta2 provides ints and dev_ts. As these arguments are covered by an ellipsis in the C prototype, no conversion is done by the compiler. Usually it works out O.K. on little-endian