If you do a graphical install of RH 7.0 (& it might also apply to 7.1) you
can RAID everything, including /boot and /
Why they don't offer it in the text install I don't have the vaguest idea
- Rob Hart, any reasons?
And it works nicely. I even have Pick Systems (or whoever they are now)
D3 running on top of RH RAID.
--
Howard. LANNet Computing Associates <http://lannetlinux.com>
_____________________________________________________________
"We needn't, as socialists, get too concerned about privacy;
it's a bourgeois right, closely allied to the right to private property".
- Former Federal Health Minister Neal Blewett,
addressing the Fabian Society in 1988 in relation to the Australia Card issue.
On Thu, 5 Jul 2001, Graeme Robinson wrote:
> I've configured software RAID1 for disk redundancy on a couple of server
> using the
> e-smith distro of redhat - you simply select it as an option at install
> time (post 4.1) But you
> may not wish to use e-smith, which is highly customised for
> fileserving/internet gateway use.
>
> I haven't tried hardware RAID but unless you are doing massive file
> copying you probably won't notice things slowing down much under the
> software implementation. E-smith say
> their is a 5% cpu overhead due to software RAID1 at most.
> I have heard of a number of RAID cards working out of the box - basically
> check the RedHat HAL(hardware.redhat.com) to confirm compatibility (or the
> chosen hal register of your distribution).
>
> -=-=-==-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
> Graeme Robinson - Graenet consulting
> www.graenet.com - internet solutions
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==---=-=--=-=-=
>
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I can recommend SW raid in a production env. We have two
> > samba servers that have been running software raid for over a year
> > with no problems at all.
> >
> > One is running raid 0 for speed/size reasons and the other is
> > running 5 for reliability. Unfortunately this period includes no actual
> > disk trouble (other than simulated) so in a real failure your mileage
> > may vary.
> >
> > As for speed I suspect SW raid is faster than HW raid for a given
> > price point. I'd expect x86 MIPS to be much much cheaper than
> > dedicated controller MIPS. Instead of buying a HW RAID soln go
> > with SW and throw the saved money into /CPU/memory/disk
> > improvements and be happy.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Rod
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: John Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: [SLUG] RAID advice wanted
> > Date sent: Thu, 5 Jul 2001 11:17:54 +1000
> >
> > > Thanks John, Ian and Marty for your replies.
> > >
> > > I'm after the redundancy so that the server stays up if a drive fails.
> > > I don't need superfast performance. The lower performance of software
> > > RAID is acceptable.
> > >
> > > What I do need though is for the system to keep running if a drive
> > > fails, and for it to be easy to replace the dead drive. If the server
> > > has to be taken down for a couple of minutes to install a replacement
> > > drive, that's OK.
> > >
> > > However, if I did go for hardware RAID, does anyone have
> > > recommendations for a controller that's supported by Linux?
> > >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > John
> > > --
> > > whois [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > > --
> > > SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More
> > > Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
> > >
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------
> > Rod Tunks
> > Hardware R&D Manager
> > TPG Network, Canberra
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (02)62851711
> >
> > "bad or missing Coffee.sys - operator halted"
> > ICQ: 4514607
> >
> > --
> > SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
> > More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
