On Sun, 8 Jul 2001, Bruno Prior wrote:
> Ross,
>
> > > difference. The disks are each in removeable containers, which accept
> > > only 40-pin connectors. The disks are therefore running at UDMA-33 at
> >
> > Get them out now. I've done a lot of experimenting with RAID5 over IDE
> > and these things have been a disaster in most of my testing. I built
> > a RADI5 machine out of IBM Deskstar 18G drives when 18G was bleeding
> > edge.
>
> I think we have travelled the same path. This setup replaces a machine
> that used RAID-1, -5 and -0 based on 4 17Gb drives. I got the same DMA
> errors as below with that machine, but it was quite fast enough without
> UDMA, and was otherwise entirely stable. This was using the same
> removeable containers, so I think you may well be right that this is
> what's causing the interference that's forcing IDE to run slower than
> the maximum possible, but I doubt this is what is causing the lockup.
>
> If you are suggesting that you should not use containers at all for IDE
> RAID, then there is a bit of a conundrum here. The point of RAID is
> (basically) to allow a machine to keep running if one of the disks
> fails. But if you don't have your disks in removeable containers, you
> will have to shutdown the machine to fix it anyway.
You cannot hotswap IDE drives. The only case where this does seem to
work is with thinkpad laptops. If you want to hotswap you need SCSI.
Holger
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
