On Sat, 17 Apr 1999, Michael wrote:
Hi,
> > > The reason is that on a master-slave setup, the slave disc is controlled
> > > by the master. If on a [hda-hdc]+[hdb-hdd] raid 0+1 the master device of
> > > *any* IDE controller fails, the slave will inmediatly fail also (I'd bet
> > > it su
> > The reason is that on a master-slave setup, the slave disc is controlled
> > by the master. If on a [hda-hdc]+[hdb-hdd] raid 0+1 the master device of
> > *any* IDE controller fails, the slave will inmediatly fail also (I'd bet
> > it surelly will happen if it's the slave who fails, so this sta
On Wed, 14 Apr 1999, Francisco Jose Montilla wrote:
> The reason is that on a master-slave setup, the slave disc is controlled
> by the master. If on a [hda-hdc]+[hdb-hdd] raid 0+1 the master device of
> *any* IDE controller fails, the slave will inmediatly fail also (I'd bet
> it surelly will
On Tue, 6 Apr 1999, Stein Gjoen wrote:
Hi,
> In the Multi Disk HOWTO there are already some notes on
> optimum use of disks and RAID levels that you might find
> of interest.
> http://www.nyx.net/~sgjoen/disk.html
>
> All feedback is welcome; I wrote it.
I have a little s
