23,x203
http://www.csi.cc Computer Science Innovations
http://www.csi.cc/~mike My home page
FAX 407-676-2355
- Original Message -
From: Chris R. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 12:02 PM
Subjec
> Forgive my novice question, but is this implying that with a SCSI
> arrangement, failure of one drive will not lock/affect the SCSI bus?
Failure of a **DRIVE** should not effect the SCSI bus at all.
Failure of the *controller* (real failures are very rare, normally it is power
loss) can cause
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
> It's been said that with IDE, if the master drive fails the slave one
> is also unavailable, which means that you lose TWO drives (I haven't
Forgive my novice question, but is this implying that with a SCSI
arrangement, failure of one drive will not lock/affect the SCSI b
[...]
> We will infact put each IDE drive on its own channel, but our testing
> reveals that RAID5 doesn't know when to stop (or maybe how to
> stop gracefully) If two drives go out I would hope that the array
> just stop, not corrupt the data, or continue operating.
>
> This same secene
Chris R. Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 17 May 1999 21:08:
>We've experienced a few odd anomalies during testing our IDE RAID-5
>array ( 6 x 16gb =80g).
>
>We started with a good running array and did an e2fsck to ensure its
>integrity...
>
>We simulated a drive failure by disconnecti
> We've experienced a few odd anomalies during testing our IDE RAID-5
> array ( 6 x 16gb =80g).
raidtools 0.90 with raid0145 patches ?
> We simulated a drive failure by disconnecting a drive's power, and if
> the IDE channel contained a second drive in the RAID5 array, the array
> was permanen
> 1.Is the array still useable after it looses a drive?
I had certainly gained the impression that that was the purpose.
> We've yanked the power out of a running drive two seperate
> times, and it has not worked correctly afterwards.
Are you sure that the FS was OK before you star
