Re: Promise RAID controler problems
--- Damir Dezeljin <programing@nib.si> wrote:
> I have to set up a RAID1 (mirroring) on a machine with PROMISE
> FastTrak100
> Tx2 IDE RAID controler.
>
> Before installing linux there were Windows XP preinstalled on the
> system
> and 2 disks were configured as RAID mirror. Windows sean only one
> 'virtual' disk.
> I then installed Linux Woody and compiled kernel 2.4.18 with PROMISE
> support enabled. When I restarted the system the kernel deteched two
> disks
> (disks which should be part of the 'virtual' mirrored disk). How can
> I
> configure my RAID controler so that I got those two disks in mirror?
> I
> think that software RAID isn't a good solution, because software RAID
>
> cause two transfers trought PCI bus for every write whilest a RAID
> controler need only one transfer.
>
> Another question is where can I found some loging or errors in case
> one
> disk fails (so that I can know when I have to rebuild my mirror with
> a
> fresh disk)? Is there any software for those things or it apears in
> kernel
> output?
>
> If the 'HW RAID' configuration with my controler isn't posible, is
> there
> any other IDE RAID controler which can I use for my system?
>
> Regards,
> Dezo
>
Sorry, I can't answer your questions directly, but the Promise
controller is not a 'real' hardware RAID controller so I doubt it would
have much of an advantage over software raid. It might even be slower,
depending on the maturity of the drivers.
Software RAID is much more flexible. Easy to transfer drives to
different machine, can setup RAID-5, etc. Plus better support.
dmesg | less gives a fair bit of info, cat /proc/mdstat gives info on
software raid arrays. I use ide-smart to monitor the health of my
drives.
HTH,
Patrick.
--
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sign up for SBC Yahoo! Dial - First Month Free
http://sbc.yahoo.com
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: