> They are both SATA-2 (3Gb/s) HDDs. With the replacement drive well - I was more worrying about difference in seek time etc, but so far didn't find any difference in such vital characteristics.
just now found that I was running at SATA150 instead of SATA300+NCQ (was turned off to diagnose the problem which boiled at the end to insufficient power supply) -- probably will enable it after some unforeseen yet reboot of the system (I doubt that I should reset the RAID controller on running system, though I have cache battery) Also firmware -- good catch -- I will check it for all the drives in the RAID ;-) might benefit from upgrade (though rule remains "not broken - do not touch) -- I had really bad behavior with another hardware raid after firmware upgrade -- had to downgrade to get system running On Wed, 21 May 2008, Karen Shaeffer wrote: > They are both SATA-2 (3Gb/s) HDDs. With the replacement drive > at 500GB, it should work well for you. The raid controller > will ignore that last 100GB. You need to check the firmware > version on the replacement drive. Sometimes there are firmware > updates that aren't well publicized. That is a common problem. > This class of drives can usually be configured to run at > either 1.5Gb/s or 3.0Gb/s, with a jumper on the drive. You need > to check that. There are other optimizations available in the > newer SATA2 implementations you might want to consider. > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serial_ATA is a good place to > start learning. Good luck with it. > My advice comes without warranty of any kind. YMMV. > Thanks, > Karen -- .-. =------------------------------ /v\ ----------------------------= Keep in touch // \\ (yoh@|www.)onerussian.com Yaroslav Halchenko /( )\ ICQ#: 60653192 Linux User ^^-^^ [175555] _______________________________________________ Beowulf mailing list, [email protected] To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
