[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: How to tell when a hardware RAID disk goes bad?



Not sure about the Adaptec 5805(looking at the data sheet I don't see anywhere that it claims to do data correction in hardware - AKA "hardware-raid"). Most raid controllers are really just multiple SATA interfaces and the RAID stuff is done in the driver software. Turns out that the mdadm tools work BETTER than the proprietary drivers (from all the tests I've seen) and the best option is to use the overpriced hardware as plain-old multiple disk interfaces and use the normal mdadm tools. (People used to Redmond software might not be able to resist making something simple more complicated than it need to be.)

There are real hardware raid devices, but from a "KISS" prospective there is no reason to pay and deal with the headaches they bring with them.

With the mdadm tools there is an option to start a monitoring daemon or you can look at

/proc/mdstat

I don't see much value in raid other than raid-1 (mirror) anymore with the huge, cheap drives available. There are times with RAID-0 (striping) is used for speed. What you may save in cost using raid-5 you end up spending in electricity and headaches today.

What ever system you end up using, test and rebuild a few times (making sure you can boot no matter what drive goes down) and write down the needed steps to rebuild BEFORE putting it in any production use.


See http://www.gagme.com/greg/linux/raid-lvm.php

http://wiki.xtronics.com/index.php/Raid
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Karl Schmidt                                  EMail Karl@xtronics.com
Transtronics, Inc.                              WEB http://xtronics.com
3209 West 9th Street                             Ph (785) 841-3089
Lawrence, KS 66049                              FAX (785) 841-0434

Assumption is the mother of mistakes.
Buckaroo Banzai

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Reply to: