also sprach Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com> [2010.08.16.1514 +0200]:
> This has always been one of my hangups regarding using linux mdraid (or any
> soft OS raid) vs hardware raid--proper and seamless handling of a raid
> protected boot device, including issues beyond the topic of this thread. I
> hate admitting it, but Microsoft's implementation of a mirrored boot/system
> disk is supremely simply compared to getting the same thing from Linux.
Why don't you use it then? ;)
> I prefer LSI and Intel raid cards. I should have said merely LSI
> as the Intel cards are licensed LSI cards. Hardware raid isn't as
> flexible as softraid as it works at the entire disk level, but boy
> is it so much easier to work with,
… until your controller dies and you find out that the manufacturer
does not support the firmware anymore and your data are lost.
> as much faster.
Do you have research backing that up?
> The single biggest advantage to hardware raid is that you don't
> have to disk with changing bios boot order or anything like that
> if you have to reboot while drive in your boot array is
> offline/down/dead. It's all automatic.
Why would you have to reboot before replacing a dead drive?? That
sounds like you got your priorities wrong.
--
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> Related projects:
: :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info
`. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
"sailing is, after all, a kind of grace, a kind of magic."
-- phil berman
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)