Hi all,
While all the offers of alternative methods are genuinely appreciated,
I'm sure, they are not what the OP is looking for. He's not looking
to create an NFS server or file server of any kind, and networking
does not play a part in what he's trying to do. If it did, I doubt
he would
[ I've been having some email troubles
and have (apparently) lost messages both
inbound and outbound, so apologies if this
is a repeat, but I never saw my first post. ]
This same tantalizing idea has intrigued me on and
off for years: a PeeCee with some cheap IDE drives
and a SCSI
I've heard about this being possible with FreeBSD but I haven't been
able to find any info on it. Here's what I'm looking for:
Take a PC install a minimal Linux or *BSD on it.
Install multiple IDE disks.
Run software RAID on it
Install a SCSI card in it.
Now, connect via SCSI to another
]
Subject: Turning a PC into a RAID box?
I've heard about this being possible with FreeBSD but I haven't been
able to find any info on it. Here's what I'm looking for:
Take a PC install a minimal Linux or *BSD on it.
Install multiple IDE disks.
Run software RAID on it
Install a SCSI card
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
Are you looking to just use the external system a disk chassis with
power supply? If so, you should be able to just connect the scsi
card to the external system provided the external system as a scsi
port to connect to. It doesn't need a scsi controller, just one
of the SCSI card to connect to the
sun box.
Configure the linux system as a NFS server for the Sun Worstation to use.
-Original Message-
From: Tom Buskey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2002 11:26 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Turning a PC into a RAID box?
I've
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 12:04:52 EST
Tom Buskey said:
Basically, I'm looking at Linux/*BSD to be used as an embedded OS
controlling the RAID. The external machine just sees a SCSI drive
doesn't care about anything going on inside it to make RAID happen.
Oh, okay, so you've
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 11:25am, Tom Buskey wrote:
Now, connect via SCSI to another machine (that doesn't have IDE) use
it as an external RAID system.
What you describe is possible in theory. However, it requires the SCSI
host adapter in your Linux box to function as a SCSI target. Last I
On Thu, 2002-04-04 at 12:07, Tom Buskey wrote:
SCSI is *much* faster then ethernet. I also don't want the traffic to
go across the net.
If you set both boxes up with its own Ethernet card and just run
a crossover cable between the two, you can get full duplex 100Mbit.
Should be fast enough
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Benjamin Scott hath spake thusly:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 11:25am, Tom Buskey wrote:
Now, connect via SCSI to another machine (that doesn't have IDE) use
it as an external RAID system.
What you describe is possible
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Mark Komarinski hath spake thusly:
Say I'm running a database. NFS file locking doesn't work well. Local
disk locking does that's what this box would be. Local disk.
Wince you're not sharing the DB files with other
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 12:50:47 EST
Derek D. Martin said:
I'm not seeing it... Software RAID on the IDE devices in Linux box
presents a logical SCSI device to the kernel. How does one then make
access to this device go through the SCSI card, which is attached to
no physical
Take a PC install a minimal Linux or *BSD on it.
Install multiple IDE disks.
Run software RAID on it
Install a SCSI card in it.
Now, connect via SCSI to another machine (that doesn't have IDE) use
it as an external RAID system.
Well, as others have pointed out, using Target Mode is the way
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
What he wants to do is use Linux/*BSD as an embedded OS to act as a
RAID controller connected via the scsi bus. Signals would be
originate by the OS on the Sun box, sent across the
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 13:11:17 EST
mike ledoux said:
I'm thinking that 100Mbit/sec is somewhat slower than even the 16MB/sec
that the drive in my laptop can maintain. I'd expect that 'fast' IDE
drives in a RAID configuration should be able to do better than that.
Yeah, esp.
Benjamin Scott said:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 11:25am, Tom Buskey wrote:
Now, connect via SCSI to another machine (that doesn't have IDE) use
it as an external RAID system.
What you describe is possible in theory. However, it requires the SCSI
host adapter in your Linux box to function as a
Bayard Coolidge USG said:
Take a PC install a minimal Linux or *BSD on it.
Install multiple IDE disks.
Run software RAID on it
Install a SCSI card in it.
Now, connect via SCSI to another machine (that doesn't have IDE) use
it as an external RAID system.
Well, as others have pointed out,
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 1:17pm, Derek D. Martin wrote:
How is the SCSI card going to access the information on the IDE (i.e.
not connected to it) disks?
It isn't. The OP wants to turn his Linux box into a SCSI RAID controller.
Consider those SCSI-to-SCSI RAID boxes from Winchester Systems
This same tantalizing idea has intrigued me on and
off for years: a PeeCee with some cheap IDE drives
and a SCSI controller in it is theoretically all you
need to make a RAID box. Unfortunately, there I've
always been too busy with other things to get beyond
the Wouldn't that be cool! stage.
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 1:24pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has more to do with that he wants to do something with SCSI that
SCSI isn't necessarilly *intended* to do, but is theoretically
*capable* of doing.
Actually, SCSI was intended to do things like this. All devices on a SCSI
bus are
From: Tom Buskey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 13:27:31 -0500
Bayard Coolidge USG said:
Take a PC install a minimal Linux or *BSD on it.
Install multiple IDE disks.
Run software RAID on it
Install a SCSI card in it.
Now, connect via SCSI to another machine (that doesn't have IDE)
Benjamin Scott said:
If you think of a SCSI-to-SCSI RAID controller, you have a perfect example
of a smart device acting as a SCSI target.
The limitations we encounter here are mostly in Linux. The Linux kernel's
SCSI subsystem has long been a broken mess. My understanding is that things
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 14:17:29 EST
Benjamin Scott said:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 1:24pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It has more to do with that he wants to do something with SCSI that
SCSI isn't necessarilly *intended* to do, but is theoretically
*capable* of doing.
Actually,
Found this old (seemingly dead) project.. .might be worth contacting the
folks who started it..
http://linuxdisk.sourceforge.net/
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, Tom Buskey wrote:
Benjamin Scott said:
If you think of a SCSI-to-SCSI RAID controller, you have a perfect example
of a smart device
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 14:35:42 EST
Robert Anderson said:
Although there should be better protocols than NFS. I know there are
ones coming that will be much better!
Yeah, but are we going to have to wait until Dell finishes the
acquisition of HewPaq? ;)
They are who you might
Just to put the matter to rest, now that we've chewed on it all afternoon.
I stated what I did earlier for a reason, and left out a lot of historical
detail and other technical information, because I've been-there-done-that.
In a nutshell, shared scsi (i.e., multiple initiators on a parallel
In a message dated: Thu, 04 Apr 2002 15:35:13 EST
Bayard Coolidge USG said:
If it were MY data, I wouldn't even try to do it. Maybe some of the
MCL alumni/ae can point to some public online documentation on how to do
it, and if so, that would be wonderful - they contributed a lot of very
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 3:28pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If they don't get their lunch eaten by the bigger players in the game.
EMC, Fujitsu, Compaq, and Maxtor ...
And, from the word on the street, Microsoft. Apparently, Microsoft is
upset that all those high-end storage arrays are not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, [EMAIL PROTECTED] hath spake thusly:
it's all open source. Also, I understand that RH has based it's
clustering solution on Kimberlite and they've already gotten it
up to where the MCLX Convolo product was. Don't know if
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it's all open source. Also, I understand that RH has based it's
clustering solution on Kimberlite and they've already gotten it
up to where the MCLX Convolo product was. Don't know if they have
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 4:01pm, Derek D. Martin wrote:
Legally, they have to. Kimberlite is GPL, and any product based on it
must also be GPL.
No, any product incorporating Kimberlite's *code* has to be GPL.
RHS might simply be using Kimberlite as the foundation of a suite of
cluster
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
At some point hitherto, Benjamin Scott hath spake thusly:
On Thu, 4 Apr 2002, at 4:01pm, Derek D. Martin wrote:
Legally, they have to. Kimberlite is GPL, and any product based on it
must also be GPL.
No, any product incorporating
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking that 100Mbit/sec is somewhat slower than even the 16MB/sec
that the drive in my laptop can maintain. I'd expect that 'fast' IDE
drives in a RAID configuration should be able to do better than that.
The price of 1000 base T is down. Even Radio Shack sells
33 matches
Mail list logo
