also sprach Stan Hoeppner <s...@hardwarefreak.com> [2010.08.16.1514 +0200]: > This has always been one of my hangups regarding using linux mdraid (or any > soft OS raid) vs hardware raid--proper and seamless handling of a raid > protected boot device, including issues beyond the topic of this thread. I > hate admitting it, but Microsoft's implementation of a mirrored boot/system > disk is supremely simply compared to getting the same thing from Linux.
Why don't you use it then? ;) > I prefer LSI and Intel raid cards. I should have said merely LSI > as the Intel cards are licensed LSI cards. Hardware raid isn't as > flexible as softraid as it works at the entire disk level, but boy > is it so much easier to work with, … until your controller dies and you find out that the manufacturer does not support the firmware anymore and your data are lost. > as much faster. Do you have research backing that up? > The single biggest advantage to hardware raid is that you don't > have to disk with changing bios boot order or anything like that > if you have to reboot while drive in your boot array is > offline/down/dead. It's all automatic. Why would you have to reboot before replacing a dead drive?? That sounds like you got your priorities wrong. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madd...@d.o> Related projects: : :' : proud Debian developer http://debiansystem.info `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck http://vcs-pkg.org `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "sailing is, after all, a kind of grace, a kind of magic." -- phil berman
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/)
