Till Mommsen wrote:
>
> > > 3. Why is RAID so hard to set up on Linux?
> >
> > Huh? It was a snap for me. Perhaps it's more of an familiarity
> > issue. It
> > doesn't take me 3 days to set up an FTP server or 2 days for a
> > nameserver...
> > maybe hours but not days.
> >
> > That should be a real consideration. Setting up a server that you are not
> > sure of and not comfortable with will almost certainly result in a Bad Day
> > if something goes wrong. I certainly would not know the first thing about
> > setting up NT server with Raid and therefore wouldn't recommend a
> > production
> > server on it - especially if I would be responsible for it - even
> > though it
> > may do just fine.
>
> Well, I don't want to start a basic discussion about Linux pro's and con's,
> but I agree with Shon and there are a few things about Linux and RAID that I
> feel should should be said. I have started to use Linux in production
> environments half a year ago. Now I got servers running root RAID1, Samba,
> Amanda, Firewall/dial-up router etc. Nevertheless, I can calculate if
> something takes me two hours with NT it will take at least two days with
> Linux to really get it running, understand what is going on and to debug it.
> Of course, after I set up things with Linux, I can forget the machine, it
> runs just fine.
And this is an important point fo rme. I would rather spend extra time
in setup, than repeatedly spend time 'fixing' things.
>
> I really like Linux (although it somethimes occurs to me that Linux maybe
> doesn't like me...), but at this point, I expect a big "bang" to Linux: It
> has been praised by the press. Lots of Win-Admins will suggest Linux to
> their IT Managers. But what will they hear, if, after maybe three weeks of
> experimenting (and that's the minimum it will take for a Win-Linux
> converter), there is still nothing really presentable? Will the positive
> press messages continue? What, if the positive publicity turns, because
> Linux is stamped "command line gurus only"?
No different, since we started, and still have, that stamp.
>
> Marc, you are saying you wouldn't want to setup a RAID1 on NT. Have you
> tried it? Since you know computers I'd think it will take you 30 minutes the
> first time. Just because that's the time you need to find the right program
> in the help files. Not beacause you will encounter any trouble. After the
> first time, you'll do it in five minutes while you are having a pizza (if
> you can eat that fast). A beginner will need two hours. RAID handling is not
> much more difficult.
Aside from the time it toook to actually compile the kernel, raid took
me all of about 5 minutes on Linux (counting the kernel, still under ten
:). This is one thing no UI, whether graphical or command line, can
anticipate well.
Many of the things that take mere seconds or minutes in NT for me take
significantly longer in NT.
(OT side note: yesterday I tried navigating and using the file browser
in GNOME, and was having difficulty remembering where things were at on
the fs. ...).
Bet you could set up S-RAID in Linux in 5 minutes now too ;-)
>
> I really do not want to critize anybody here (and I certainly wouldn't feel
> entiteled to). But, after following this list (and others) for six months
> now, I've seen 11 Kernels and thousands of traps, hints and methods how to
> setup RAID. Redhat doesn't seem to be able to include an easy and correct
> RAID setup in their distribution. SuSE and others don't even mention
> anything about it. Why? But, what's one of the first thing somebody does,
> who sets up a Server? - He thinks about RAID. It's nice that SW RAID is
> faster and - theoretically - cheaper than HW. But what, if you calculate the
> time it takes you to implement SW RAID?
The lack of a distibution putting out a properly configured distribution
is not really a reflection on the raidtools. RH tried for bragging
rights, I imagine, and because they are aiming at corporate entry.
For me, the first thing I think about when setting up a server is:
security. But, ask 100 admins ...;^)
But will you do it more than once?
How often will you set up a software raid array? If you do it
frequently, the time/cost to learn it amortizes well. Additionally, you
would factor in the cost of learning how to get NT to cope with the
particular hardware choice. How much would this run at ~400$US/call to
MS? (not always neccesary, but frequently).
>
> This is not a speech for GUI's and MS. I started Linux because I didn't like
> Bill and the way MS is running things. I was sick of protection faults, user
> profile spying, monopol, and so on. And so far, I struggeld my way through.
> Thanks to your help here. I am sure, others with the same profile have and
> will follow. But: how many "newbie questions" can you support?
As many as need be. :-)
Remembering that raidtools is still < 1.0, many of these issues are
still developing. As the tools mature, other aspects, such as a gui will
follow. I have considered making a little raidtab configurator gui, when
I get time, and more mastery of pygtk/gtk.
> Maybe you won't agree. But it is an idea: shouldn't some of the energy spent
> in developing new features be spent in making RAID more user friendly?
> Change the strategy a bit from moving forward to making it accessible?
IMO, until 1.1 (1.0x?), stability, performance, and reliability should
be first.
> ...was just some philosophic thinking.... Please don't kill me for the noise
> and those heretical thoughts :-) (At least, this time it's not the happy99
> virus I am sending out. Are thoughts like this considered a Virus?).
>
According to 'K', they are ;-)
Later ...
