> ?! I've got three promise controllers doing duty
There can be problems with plain-ATA support on some of those Promise
controllers, been there done that. Ok so maybe they're somewhere between
no pain and only pain, but we're agreed on no gain? So why risk it? One
more bit of complexity without
?! I've got three promise controllers doing duty
Home
:00:09.0 Unknown mass storage controller: Promise Technology, Inc.
PDC20267 (FastTrak100/Ultra100) (rev 02)
belt
:01:04.0 Unknown mass storage controller: Promise Technology, Inc.
PDC20268 (Ultra100 TX2) (rev 02)
suspenders
:01:0
Michael JasonSmith wrote:
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 08:37 +1200, Carl Cerecke wrote:
On 27/09/05, Michael JasonSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I was in this very predicament last night. Almost forced to eat my bytes.
See. You were lucky!
You do realise that vi is the centre of evil
evil
e*vi*l
get it?
same as ex is the center of sexy
Cheers,
Carl.
On 28/09/05, Michael JasonSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 08:37 +1200, Carl Cerecke wrote:
> > On 27/09/05, Michael JasonSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I was in this very predicament last night
> Not really - a PCI Promise IDE controller is about $100.
Do yourself a favour and *don't* get anything Promise, Promise is only
pain, no gain.
A simple IDE PCI card (no Promise) is $60 up. Compared with an old piece
of computer hardware worth < $300 that is relatively expensive. Of
course in a
Not really - a PCI Promise IDE controller is about $100.
And it will work at ATA-100 speeds even on older machines. I have one in a
celeron 433 that would only otherwise do ATA-33.
Hardware IDE raid cards on the other hand Are expensive.
-Original Message-
From: Volker Kuhlmann [mai
On Wed, 2005-09-28 at 08:37 +1200, Carl Cerecke wrote:
> On 27/09/05, Michael JasonSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I was in this very predicament last night. Almost forced to eat my bytes.
See. You were lucky!
> You do realise that vi is the centre of evil, do you not?
No, "ex" is the centr
On Wed, September 28, 2005 10:04 am, Carl Cerecke wrote:
> It's a small-form-factor case (COMPAQ deskpro). I was impressed that
> it actually had two IDE connectors, as well as a specialised CDROM
> connector. In any case, there is only room for two devices + floppy in
> the case. This is sitting
On 28/09/05, Volker Kuhlmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > at the same time reports 13 MB/s. I suspect that putting one of the drives
> > on
> > the secondary IDE will result in better overall performance, but I'm not
> > sure.
>
> Forget about software raid any number unless all disks have thei
Yes you will get a substantial improvement when you dedicate an ide
channel per physical disk. When sharing, only one operation can be
performed at a time ( on IDE - but not SCSI or SATA istr ), which results
in the halving of performance on each disk that you have seen.
However, make sure that th
> at the same time reports 13 MB/s. I suspect that putting one of the drives on
> the secondary IDE will result in better overall performance, but I'm not sure.
Forget about software raid any number unless all disks have their very
own IDE cable. The 5 bucks for a cable is definitely a worthwhile
I've got a box full of cables if you need one Carl.
Lance B
Carl Cerecke wrote:
Hi,
I'm planning on setting up software RAID 1 on a p3-600 at home.
At the moment, I have both HDD on the primary ide (hda and hdb).
Individually hdparm -t reports about 26MB/s, but running hdparm -t on both disks
Hi,
I'm planning on setting up software RAID 1 on a p3-600 at home.
At the moment, I have both HDD on the primary ide (hda and hdb).
Individually hdparm -t reports about 26MB/s, but running hdparm -t on both disks
at the same time reports 13 MB/s. I suspect that putting one of the drives on
the se
On 27/09/05, Michael JasonSmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 16:34 +1200, Carl Cerecke wrote:
> > :q!
>
> You need a wee bit more so you can edit the config files to the sage
> where you can install XEmacs ;)
I was in this very predicament last night. Almost forced to eat my
Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
Indeed, but what Steve said is _very_ valid none the less, and similarly
*never* vi /etc/group use vigr instead
Well let's cut the editor stuff and keep in mind not to edit /etc/passwd
and /etc/group directly. Of course, one can just use the programs made
for this s
> Indeed, but what Steve said is _very_ valid none the less, and similarly
> *never* vi /etc/group use vigr instead
Well let's cut the editor stuff and keep in mind not to edit /etc/passwd
and /etc/group directly. Of course, one can just use the programs made
for this sort of job: {user,group}{add
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 22:00 +1200, Christopher Sawtell wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 20:16, Nick Rout wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 17:51 +1200, Steve Holdoway wrote:
> > > And *never* vi /etc/passwd.
> >
> > It was an example!
> Indeed, but what Steve said is _very_ valid none the less, and simi
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 20:16, Nick Rout wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 17:51 +1200, Steve Holdoway wrote:
> > And *never* vi /etc/passwd.
>
> It was an example!
Indeed, but what Steve said is _very_ valid none the less, and similarly
*never* vi /etc/group use vigr instead, and for the puppies who are
On Tue, 27 Sep 2005 18:22, Volker Kuhlmann wrote:
> > What's counterintuitive about a = append, i = insert
>
> Well the one thing more intuitive and faster than a and i is not having
> to use them in the first place...
>
> > Also, all the pattern matching constructs out of grep are available in
> >
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 17:51 +1200, Steve Holdoway wrote:
> And *never* vi /etc/passwd.
It was an example!
20 matches
Mail list logo
