On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> Yes and no. You get bigger space, but suffer in throughput and utility.
> Thre 4.5GB SCSI-U2, on a AHA-2940, make a much faster and more reliable
> disk-set than the same thing in UDMA. The normal performance vs space
> trade-off seems to apply her
I'd like to explain why the HW numbers aren't strictly the issue, in IT
departments. There are two things that increase annual cost,
non-standard equipment, and high-admin equipment. IDE, at half the cost,
might increase labor costs by much more than the difference in purchase
price. A thousand do
I have now read 3 articles on Mylex's AcceleRAID controllers, but nothing
really in-depth.
Has anyone run an AcceleRAID and what were your thoughts on the card??
TIA
Christian Brink
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes and no. You get bigger space, but suffer in throughput and utility.
Thre 4.5GB SCSI-U2, on a AHA-2940, make a much faster and more reliable
disk-set than the same thing in UDMA. The normal performance vs space
trade-off seems to apply here.
> -Original Message-
> From: Tom Rini [mailt
Marc Mutz wrote:
> You should have bought SCSI disks. They may would have been cheaper,
> too, because you need only one controller for three disks. (Sorry -could
> not resist :-)
I know it's fun for all the server purists to knock eide, but it does have
some advantages:
A mythical ~90GB array:
On Tue, 27 Jul 1999, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> I just saw 4.5GB SCSI-UW drives, at Fry's, for $168US. How much disk
> space do you need?
Not to go too far off topic but, see what $168 gets you in IDE. Since
I've done a little bit oflooking into this, I'll post some notes Ive
found: (note, all
Kiyan Azarbar wrote:
>
> I would like to run RAID5 (3 disks in the array, maybe some room in the future
> for one spare disk). Right now I've got my linux root partition (well, pretty
> much everything is under /, it's meant to be a server) on /dev/hda (4 gig
> Quantum CR). I have 3 12 gig Quantu
Hi linux raid gurus,
we're using RAID on our system for 1 1/2 year and everything
works very well (slackware 3.4, linux 2.1.128, raidtools 0.42).
(Except for some trouble with e2fsck on our RAID-5 Array. The server
hangs, and we have to load a very old kernel and use the mdtools in
the ramdisk
>
> Zach:
>
> This is a question about your hardware setup...I can not answer about your
> software question.
>
> I am also wanting to set a system using ultra66 for 2 raid1 drives.
>
> If you are following the Linux-raid mail list, you have probably seen that
> some people are not to hot on u
I can verify that at least the DPT SmartRaid IV board is a dog. I have one
with 3 wide channels connecting 4 18GB Seagate Cheetah (10k RPM) drives in
RAID 5. It also has 32MB cache. This is in a dual PII 400 system with 256MB
RAM.
Under Linux (Radhat 6.0) IOzone and Bonnie shows about 2.5MB/sec w
I just saw 4.5GB SCSI-UW drives, at Fry's, for $168US. How much disk
space do you need?
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Thomas Willert
> Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 11:30 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Raid Mailing List
> Subject:
I would like to run RAID5 (3 disks in the array, maybe some room in the future
for one spare disk). Right now I've got my linux root partition (well, pretty
much everything is under /, it's meant to be a server) on /dev/hda (4 gig
Quantum CR). I have 3 12 gig Quantum EX's: /dev/hdb, hdc, and hdd.
> Hardware raid, the IBM serveraid ips, has tools under linux to add
> drives on the fly,
Hrm, I wasn't able to find anything on this. URL?
> I belive that when I played with the dpt you could add drives, via dos.
This is an Alpha-based system. Having to boot into DOS is, ba
>
> I saw the post around May that stated that adding drives to an existing
> RAID5 array is still not possible. Is there anyone working on this? Has
> there been any progress made whatsoever? We'd really like to be able to do
> this (for obvious reasons).
>
> What good alternatives are there to
I saw the post around May that stated that adding drives to an existing
RAID5 array is still not possible. Is there anyone working on this? Has
there been any progress made whatsoever? We'd really like to be able to do
this (for obvious reasons).
What good alternatives are there to RAID5, if this
> that does for you. Perhaps those are the correct steps for a brand new
> unformatted drive. I did not have to do anything with the partitions.
Nono.. With new (unformatted) drive you have to create the partition(s)
first, that's for sure. I explained the reason for the strange, complicated
m
On Mon, 26 Jul 1999, James Deptuck wrote:
> Does anyone have any experiences with particular hardware raid controlers
> that they'd be willing to share?
> What's the most reliable controler?
I have experience with the DPT 3334 in several production servers.
It may not be the fastest hardware RAI
On Mon, Jul 26, 1999 at 07:54:49PM +0200, Thomas Willert wrote:
> /usr/include/linux/errno.h:4: asm/errno.h: No such file or directory
# cd /usr/src/linux
# make symlinks
L.
--
Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Communications Media & Services S.r.l.
> > support is still a little buggy under linux.
Meaning support for the U/66 is raw. Ultra/33 is solid and as fast as
intel's PIIX4E chipset.
> > i recommend HIGHLY against using 4 ide drives. they cannot recover from
> > problems like io timeouts, etc, and are not hotswapable.
All true, but
19 matches
Mail list logo
