On Fri, 28 Mar 2008, Stephan Seitz wrote:
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:41:27PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Then DROP the idea of hw-raid. Get a damn good SATA/SCSI/SAS HBA, and
use software raid. BTW, damn good means no VIA, SiS, nVidia, or other
el-cheap-o half-broken SATA
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 10:41:27PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Then DROP the idea of hw-raid. Get a damn good SATA/SCSI/SAS HBA, and
use software raid. BTW, damn good means no VIA, SiS, nVidia, or other
el-cheap-o half-broken SATA
Can you give some examples for a good SATA HBA?
On 2008-03-19, Michael S. Peek penned:
This would be fine, I don't really care if it's a hardware or
software RAID, although it seems like a waste of money to buy a
hardware RAID card just to use as a dense SATA controller. Is there
such a thing as a SATA controller just for lots of drives?
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Luke S Crawford wrote:
What we are looking for here is a good enough raid solution... something
that costs significantly less than completely duplicating the $800 server
or workstation in question, (meaning most good raid solutions you
Then DROP the idea of hw-raid. Get a
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Gregory Seidman wrote:
See, here's the thing. That I in RAID is for inexpensive. The idea is to
increase reliability on the cheap. You could engineer an amazing HD with a
Err, the I is for inexpensive *DISKS* not an inexpensive ARRAY CONTROLLER
:-)
be hideously expensive.
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 03:56:00PM -0400, Michael S. Peek wrote:
But now I'm looking to build replacement servers and I thought I would
ask what the community uses for it's hardware RAID, and why?
I only use hardware raid where a battery-backed-up ram cache is available
and the performance
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/20/08 20:54, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Tue, 18 Mar 2008, Gregory Seidman wrote:
See, here's the thing. That I in RAID is for inexpensive. The idea is to
increase reliability on the cheap. You could engineer an amazing HD with a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ron Johnson wrote:
And that detailed care makes all the difference in the world! Now limp
along with a drive failure, add a controller that needs updating and
perform the update. Suddenly you find the meta data is unstable and
you can not
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:09:26PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 10:18, Luke S Crawford wrote:
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or... don't buy sucky h/w in the first place. If you *really* care
about your data, you spend the
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 05:41:20PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 17:21, Gregory Seidman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:33:19PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 16:03, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:37:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 15:44, Mike Bird wrote:
On Tue March 18 2008 12:56:00 Michael S. Peek wrote:
But now I'm looking to build replacement servers and I thought I would
ask what the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/08 07:03, Alex Samad wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 05:41:20PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 17:21, Gregory Seidman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:33:19PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 16:03, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/08 07:02, Alex Samad wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 10:09:26PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
We just bought 2 Linux clusters with (I think) EVA 5000 SANs. 40
total TB of SCSI drives, I think.
strange I thought eva 3000's and 5000's went eol
Alex Samad wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:37:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 15:44, Mike Bird wrote:
On Tue March 18 2008 12:56:00 Michael S. Peek wrote:
But now I'm looking to build replacement servers and I thought
Johannes Wiedersich wrote:
Snip
I think what Damon wanted to say that with MD you typically don't expect
data loss *even* though you don't pay for expensive service and
maintenance.
Our Raid controller broke just weeks before it went out of warranty and
no, we didn't plan to spend the money on
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Having done support for a tier1 OEM, I found
many of our customers (running Linux) ignored the raid controllers and
used them as disk controllers and then used software raid.
This would be fine, I don't really care if it's a hardware or software
RAID, although it seems
Michael S. Peek wrote:
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Having done support for a tier1 OEM, I found
many of our customers (running Linux) ignored the raid controllers and
used them as disk controllers and then used software raid.
This would be fine, I don't really care if it's a hardware or software
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/08 10:52, Michael S. Peek wrote:
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Having done support for a tier1 OEM, I found
many of our customers (running Linux) ignored the raid controllers and
used them as disk controllers and then used software raid.
Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Alas! I just don't know about SATA controllers. Given your
situation, it would appear that your plan is the best one. I would
stick with what you know and what you know works. Time is short and
your rep is on the line. Beyond that, I would have to let some one
Michael S. Peek wrote:
SNIP
So I'm not a complete loon? Excellent. At least that makes me feel
better.
Like I said, in the past I've used 3ware, but on the last build I did
I couldn't get the monitoring software to run. The command-line tool
worked fine, but the monitor would
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/08 12:59, Michael S. Peek wrote:
[snip]
shot. (For instance, it doesn't know the difference between not OK and
VERIFYING, so once a week I get 99 emails that say, An error was
found: VERIFYING 1%, 2%, 3%, ...)
grep error | grep -v
Michael S. Peek [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
...That is, unless someone knows a good and cheap way to have big-time
data density outside the machine. The other option I'm looking at is
a NAS, but it seems to me that the cheaper solution is to build a
storage server myself instead.
Price it out
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 08:15:09AM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/19/08 07:03, Alex Samad wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 05:41:20PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 17:21, Gregory Seidman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:33:19PM
On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 11:46:17AM -0400, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Alex Samad wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:37:30PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 15:44, Mike Bird wrote:
On Tue March 18 2008 12:56:00 Michael S. Peek wrote:
Hello gurus,
I have built a couple of large storage servers using 16-24 HDDs
connected to 3ware controllers, and so far it's worked pretty well. I
chose 3ware because it was supported by the linux kernel out of the box.
Although I'm not terribly satisfied with the managing software, the
Michael S. Peek wrote:
Hello gurus,
I have built a couple of large storage servers using 16-24 HDDs
connected to 3ware controllers, and so far it's worked pretty well. I
chose 3ware because it was supported by the linux kernel out of the
box. Although I'm not terribly satisfied with the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 14:56, Michael S. Peek wrote:
Hello gurus,
I have built a couple of large storage servers using 16-24 HDDs
connected to 3ware controllers, and so far it's worked pretty well. I
chose 3ware because it was supported by the linux
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 15:41, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[snip]
changes in HD tech). 6. I have seen dozens of catastrophic hardware
controller failures with complete data lost and not one mdadm failure.
That just means you're using sucky hardware. We've been
On Tue March 18 2008 12:56:00 Michael S. Peek wrote:
But now I'm looking to build replacement servers and I thought I would
ask what the community uses for it's hardware RAID, and why?
We use nothing for hardware RAID. Software RAID is much more
flexible. With hardware RAID you always need to
Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 15:41, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[snip]
changes in HD tech). 6. I have seen dozens of catastrophic hardware
controller failures with complete data lost and not one mdadm failure.
That just means you're
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 16:03, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 15:41, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[snip]
changes in HD tech). 6. I have seen dozens of catastrophic hardware
controller failures with complete data lost and not one
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 15:44, Mike Bird wrote:
On Tue March 18 2008 12:56:00 Michael S. Peek wrote:
But now I'm looking to build replacement servers and I thought I would
ask what the community uses for it's hardware RAID, and why?
We use nothing for
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:33:19PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 16:03, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 15:41, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[snip]
changes in HD tech). 6. I have seen dozens of catastrophic
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 17:21, Gregory Seidman wrote:
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 04:33:19PM -0500, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 16:03, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 03/18/08 15:41, Damon L. Chesser wrote:
[snip]
changes in HD tech). 6.
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or... don't buy sucky h/w in the first place. If you *really* care
about your data, you spend the extra bucks for quality h/w that has
a competent support staff behind it. And you pay for an adequate
backup solution!
I think most people on this list are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/18/08 10:18, Luke S Crawford wrote:
Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Or... don't buy sucky h/w in the first place. If you *really* care
about your data, you spend the extra bucks for quality h/w that has
a competent support staff
On (30/07/05 12:13), jennyw wrote:
Anyone care to recommend SATA RAID controllers?
I'd like to setup a relatively inexpensive box with hardware RAID 1. The
system will use Sarge. I was wondering if anyone had hardware suggestions.
I found a SATA RAID FAQ at:
Am 2005-07-30 12:13:13, schrieb jennyw:
Anyone care to recommend SATA RAID controllers?
3Ware 3w8000-2LPIn germany around 120 Euro
However, it also seems that there some RAID hardware uses other drivers,
such as 3Ware (of course, I'm not sure that 3Ware counts as inexpensive,
3Ware
Anyone care to recommend SATA RAID controllers?
I'd like to setup a relatively inexpensive box with hardware RAID 1. The
system will use Sarge. I was wondering if anyone had hardware suggestions.
I found a SATA RAID FAQ at:
http://linux.yyz.us/sata/sata-status.html
Reading through the list,
39 matches
Mail list logo
