.
On Dec 22, 1:18 pm, Ulrich Windl ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de
wrote:
On 22 Dec 2008 at 2:19, Eric wrote:
Hello,
I'm going to setup a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess was someone here might
have
a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess was someone here might
have experience with this.
I'm going to use the following topology:
There will be 2 storage servers exporting targets. Other physical
machines will initiate
22, 1:18 pm, Ulrich Windl ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de
wrote:
On 22 Dec 2008 at 2:19, Eric wrote:
Hello,
I'm going to setup a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess was someone here might
have experience
On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 9:13 AM, Andrew McGill list2...@lunch.za.net wrote:
From another list, the mail below is a proposal to change the default
partition table for disks from 512 bytes to 4096 bytes. I think that once
implemented (in a few years / days time), it will make some of the
Hello,
I'm going to setup a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess was someone here might
have experience with this.
I'm going to use the following topology:
There will be 2 storage servers exporting targets. Other physical
machines
like this?
http://groups.google.com/group/open-iscsi/browse_thread/thread/4caaf406fe8165ab/f021bae5e175ed59#f021bae5e175ed59
2008/12/22 Eric ericvanblokl...@gmail.com
Hello,
I'm going to setup a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess
Hello,
I'm going to setup a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess was someone here might
have experience with this.
I'm going to use the following topology:
There will be 2 storage servers exporting targets. Other physical
We'd be using iSCSI Enterprise Target (iscsitarget.sourceforge.net).
Ofcourse, the target implementation to use in this setup is open for
discussion.
On Dec 22, 12:00 pm, Bart Van Assche bart.vanass...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 11:19 AM, Eric ericvanblokl...@gmail.com wrote:
On 22 Dec 2008 at 2:19, Eric wrote:
Hello,
I'm going to setup a software raid over iSCSI. While I probably should
ask my question to the raid people, my guess was someone here might
have experience with this.
I'm going to use the following topology:
There will be 2 storage servers
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Ulrich Windl
ulrich.wi...@rz.uni-regensburg.de wrote:
I think since ZBR (Zone Bit Recording) the number of sectors per cylinder is
variable. thus it makes no sense for any higher-level disk software to try to
deal
with heads or cylinders. Since ATA (about
Bart,
Thanks for definitive answer and the link to a great thread. I need
one more:
I have to set the heads and cylinders on the disk partitions of the
virtualized servers. Now I assume I also have to set heads and
cylinders on the raid partions, exported by the targets. Is this
assumption
On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 2:17 PM, Eric ericvanblokl...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks for definitive answer and the link to a great thread. I need
one more:
I have to set the heads and cylinders on the disk partitions of the
virtualized servers. Now I assume I also have to set heads and
cylinders
Bart,
My use of the term partitions is terrible abuse ofcourse. I mean the
CHS layout ofcourse.
I've a semi-production test setup where I will apply these changes and
see what happens. The setup is far from ideal because if have some
cheap-ass 3com switches which don't support jumbo frames or
13 matches
Mail list logo
