-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
El 2007-04-05 a las 23:07 -0400, Larry Stotler escribió:
(you forgot to email to the list)
On 4/5/07, Carlos E. R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With any type of raid, any level?
I can understand this working with a mirror set: the kernel can load
Larry Stotler wrote:
On 4/5/07, Larry Stotler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Further, what are your system specs? Pentium 3? K6-2? Athlon?
Speed? Chipset?
Look at the file /var/log/boot.msg for more system specific info.
Pentium 3 450Mhz and the chip set is Intel4408BX AGP
I looked at the
On 4/6/07, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pentium 3 450Mhz and the chip set is Intel4408BX AGP
Then it's probably an ATA/33 drive controller. It should support the
newer drives up to 120GB, but you won't get the full speed out of
them. You could try a PCI IDE controller, or look for a SATA
On 2007-04-04 22:53, dwain wrote:
snip
first to load (?) and the board manufacturer says with the BIOS update I
have that the largest drive I can use is 40GB, how do I get a larger
drive to be read so I can load the operating system on it? Not that I
need anything larger than a 40GB drive
Rajko M. wrote:
I'm sure that even with the BIOS limitation to 1024 cylinders, which is long
time obsolete, it was possible to use much larger drives than recognized by
the BIOS. The only limitation was that kernel and initrd must be within first
1024 cylinders. That was usually assured by
James Knott wrote:
Isn't a separate /boot also required when using LVM or software RAID?
Not any more. It was recommended with 8.0 or maybe 8.2, but I know I
quit having a separate boot for my software raid 1 with 9.3, and it is
working with no real problems now with 10.2.
--
Joe Morris
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Thursday 2007-04-05 at 20:05 +0800, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
James Knott wrote:
Isn't a separate /boot also required when using LVM or software RAID?
Not any more. It was recommended with 8.0 or maybe 8.2, but I know I
quit having a
Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
James Knott wrote:
Isn't a separate /boot also required when using LVM or software RAID?
Not any more. It was recommended with 8.0 or maybe 8.2, but I know I
quit having a separate boot for my software raid 1 with 9.3, and it is
working with no real problems
Carlos E. R. wrote:
With any type of raid, any level?
I'm not sure, I have only used raid 1.
--
Joe Morris
Registered Linux user 231871 running openSUSE 10.2 x86_64
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 4/5/07, Carlos E. R. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
With any type of raid, any level?
I can understand this working with a mirror set: the kernel can load from
any one side. But what about level 5, for instance? There is no single
driver from which to load the kernel, you have to read from the
On 4/5/07, Larry Stotler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/5/07, dwain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is way over my head, but I'm trying to wrap my brain around this.
I can set auto detection for the primary drive (or all of the
peripherals for that matter) in the BIOS, but since the BIOS is the
I am planning on adding a third hard drive to my mix. I will be buying
2 new larger ones, one for root and one for home and i would like to use
the third one as a swap drive.
Would it be best not to use the third one as a swap drive and leave the
swap drive on the root drive?
I also want to
dwain wrote:
I am planning on adding a third hard drive to my mix. I will be buying
2 new larger ones, one for root and one for home and i would like to use
the third one as a swap drive.
Swap is typically 2x your RAM. I haven't seen a HD available that small
for long time. Just provide
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 15:35, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
dwain wrote:
I am planning on adding a third hard drive to my mix. I will be
buying 2 new larger ones, one for root and one for home and i would
like to use the third one as a swap drive.
Swap is typically 2x your RAM.
This is
On Thu, 2007-04-05 at 06:35 +0800, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
dwain wrote:
I am planning on adding a third hard drive to my mix. I will be
buying
2 new larger ones, one for root and one for home and i would like to
use
the third one as a swap drive.
Swap is typically 2x your RAM. I
Randall R Schulz wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 15:35, Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
dwain wrote:
I am planning on adding a third hard drive to my mix. I will be
buying 2 new larger ones, one for root and one for home and i would
like to use the third one as a swap drive.
Joe Morris (NTM) wrote:
dwain wrote:
I am planning on adding a third hard drive to my mix. I will be buying
2 new larger ones, one for root and one for home and i would like to use
the third one as a swap drive.
Swap is typically 2x your RAM. I haven't seen a HD available that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
The Wednesday 2007-04-04 at 21:06 -0500, dwain wrote:
...
The
reason I'm using 40GB drives is that that's all the drive my BIOS on
this old machine will handle.
Fidlesticks! :-p
I have an old 80386SX machine, which doesn't recognise any disk
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 21:06, dwain wrote:
...
I am replacing a 13GB drive and a 4GB drive with 2 40GB 7200rpm drives.
I had intended to use a 2GB drive that I have for the swap drive.
The 2 GB is probably very slow comparing to 40 GB, so just don't use it.
The
reason I'm using 40GB
Greg Freemyer wrote:
If you are using swap enough to worry about the speed of the drive,
you have something wrong in my opinion.
Do a vmstat 5 and watch the so column. If it is zero most of the
time you're not really using swap. i.e Nothing is being sent to swap.
If it is typically
Rajko M. wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 21:06, dwain wrote:
...
Have you tried a bigger drive.
BIOS is relevant only for the first moments of booting, and for placement of
boot partition.
Yes I have. Before I updated the BIOS I tried a 40GB drive and the
machine didn't
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 22:37, dwain wrote:
Rajko M. wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 21:06, dwain wrote:
...
Have you tried a bigger drive.
BIOS is relevant only for the first moments of booting, and for placement
of boot partition.
Yes I have. Before I updated the BIOS I
Rajko M. wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 22:37, dwain wrote:
Rajko M. wrote:
On Wednesday 04 April 2007 21:06, dwain wrote:
...
Have you tried a bigger drive.
BIOS is relevant only for the first moments of booting, and for placement
of boot partition.
Yes I have.
23 matches
Mail list logo
