Alain Fauconnet skrev: > Vidar, Mathias, > > Thanks for your replies. > > On Mon, Mar 06, 2006 at 08:39:41AM +0100, Vidar Tyldum Hansen wrote: >> Alain Fauconnet skrev: >>> Hello readers, >>> >>> Did anyone get some luck running a TSL installation over an Adaptec >>> 1210SA SATA 'RAID' controller? (actually using RAID). My boss just has >>> provided one such beast to me to replace a failing server, and it's a >>> "take it or leave it" situation. >>> >>> The 1210SA actually is a 'fakeraid' controller, meaning that the RAID >>> is implemented in the firmware. I've Googled around and found a lot of >>> consfusing information about this beast. There *seem* to be Linux >>> drivers both for 2.4 and 2.6 that can support the 'fakeraid'. (see >>> http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Hardware/sata.html), however it's very >>> unclear to me whether this has a chance to work in TSL 2.2 or 3.0. >> Care to elaborate why you do not want to use software RAID native to Linux? >> Using mdadm you get full support and full control. I'm migrating to >> software raid even for the servers where I have real hardware RAID. The >> performance is no worse, but the flexibility is unmatched. And I get the >> bonus of using welltested tools. > > I know, I know... that would be my approach too eventually, but > inquiring minds wants to know. After all if people have taken the pain > writing drivers supporting this kind of RAID, they must have had some > reasons doing so, right?
RAID is a buzzword for enthusiasts. A lot of people think RAID will give them better gaming performance and faster downloads. Windows doesn't do software RAID too well, and a fullblown hardware RAID is too expensive. Creating these monsters was the answer. > I don't know how good is this "firmware RAID", how does it compare to > Linux MD as for hot replacement and all what Mathias has mentioned. > Just wanted to give it a chance, I guess. Also, if these controllers > are put on the market, that must be that there is some kind of > advantage using them natively, or isn't there? Hotswapping depends on the controller, AFAIK. Very few SATA controllers out there support hotswapping, especially the cheap ones. I researched the subject of fakeraid a few years ago for a workstation with a cheap "RAID" controller. On the kernel mailinglist I read Linus saying something along the lines of (this was about Promise controllers) "we will not implement support for fakeraid on Promise controllers. Software raid is better done by kernel than driver and Promise agrees to that". (completely from memory, not an exact quote!) The point being that the *drivers* do the RAID which is a mess when you want to administer the RAID. Instead you let the kernel do the handiwork instead of making bloated drivers will full RAID functionality and no tools (or one tool per driver... *shudder*) to administer them... > Anyway I've tried booting TSL 2.2 on that box and it hangs for quite a > while during HD detection, partition table reading phases with "hdX: > lost interrupt" messages. No go. TSL 3.0 boots OK but sees only the > physical disks, which means no RAID (expected). Bummer :/ Can't help you there. > Since our standard is TSL 2.2 I'm heading towards a customized > installation of 2.2, possibly with a 2.6 kernel and yes, Linux > software RAID. This sounds far worse than loading TSL3, but you probably know what you are doing.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ tsl-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.trustix.org/mailman/listinfo/tsl-discuss
