RE: IDE controller card and Fedora Core 3

From: Joel Jaeggli (joelja_at_darkwing.uoregon.edu)
Date: 12/06/04

  • Next message: A1tmblwd_at_netscape.net: "Experience with ATRPMS repository?"
    Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2004 14:26:48 -0800 (PST)
    To: For users of Fedora Core releases <fedora-list@redhat.com>
    
    

    On Mon, 6 Dec 2004, Peter Teuben wrote:

    >
    >
    >> Having said that however, RAID *IS* a great way to squeeze performace
    >> out of older hardware for file storage and sharing purposes.
    >> Distributing reads/writes through a raid controller enables utilization
    >> of that maximum bandwidth, which would not otherwise be possible through
    >> a single drive - even newer drives.
    >
    > It was suggested in an earlier message in this thread that a RAID controller
    > has the added advantage that a dead/dying drive is not going take other
    > drives with it. On an IDE controller, it was suggested, a dead master can
    > kill a perfectly ok slave drive on the same controller. Can that be
    > substantiated, or should this be considered some kind of folklore?

    There are a numbers of ways in which a failing master can cause a slave to
    become inacessible until your remove it.

    Besides that, software raid setups with two drives per ide port will
    have vastly lower performance than giving each drive it own port.
    at this point multiport sata controllers without a raid bios make a lot of
    sense in this context... for example the promise sataII150-tx4 or tx8
    which are neither hardware raid nor promise driver based-raid controllers
    make a lot of sense...

    shopping for parallel ata100 or 133 disks doesn't make a lot of sense at
    this point.

    > - peter
    >
    >

    -- 
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
    Joel Jaeggli  	       Unix Consulting 	       joelja@darkwing.uoregon.edu 
    GPG Key Fingerprint:     5C6E 0104 BAF0 40B0 5BD3 C38B F000 35AB B67F 56B2
    -- 
    fedora-list mailing list
    fedora-list@redhat.com
    To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
    

  • Next message: A1tmblwd_at_netscape.net: "Experience with ATRPMS repository?"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: bad blocks on raid5 cause filesystem failure
      ... It is setup in in RAID 5. ... How could a RAID controller botch this up? ... should be rebuilt on spare drive if available from remaining drives. ... All is fine unless you have double fault. ...
      (comp.os.linux.hardware)
    • Re: [opensuse] Raid 5 installation
      ... I also purchased 4 WD 400G SATA drives to make a 1.09T ... raid5 array under Linux, SUSE 10.2. ... (which would defeat the hardware raid controller builtin to the MB). ...
      (SuSE)
    • Re: Dell PERC 2/SC Single Channel LVD SCSI RAID Controller
      ... 2/SC) PCI RAID controller is a high performance intelligent PCI-to-SCSI ... PERC 2/SC is an ideal RAID solution for the internal ... Multiple logical drives/arrays per controller Up to 8 logical drives ...
      (uk.adverts.computer)
    • Re: SATA vs. SCSI, RAID?
      ... Also this would depend on which controller is ... Well MS's intrinsic SW RAID 1 drivers using typical Intel mobo EIDE ... controllers for ATA or Adaptec SCSI non-RAID cards do very well here. ... But do note that I only mentioned "3x drives ...
      (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
    • Re: Do I have the correct SATA controller installed ?
      ... My intention is to use the 2 SATA hard drives as stand alone drives, ... I was just concerned I might have choosen the wrong ICH7 controller ... > Youre going about it wrong.First,if not running RAID then only 1 hd must ... >> I selected the 82801GB AHCI controller and Windows continued to install ...
      (microsoft.public.windowsxp.hardware)