Hello, MrGrumpy!
You wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2005 19:59:24 GMT:
It looks like if I want RAID0 I now have an excuse to upgrade my m/b and
chip. <g>
Been thinking about it but had decided to postpone for a while but believe I
will likely get an A8V Deluxe from Asus. I think it will handle all of my
PATA and ATAPI (or whatever a CD is called) devices as well as the SATA
raid0. If I can't restore the array I'll be aggravated but it is only OS and
programs and with changing a m/b and going to the AMD 64 stuff I would
probably reinstall the the OS anyway.
Thanks.
ColBlip.
E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
M> The raid controler writes hidden info to the disk, which is inturn used
M> by the controler to 'access/manipulate the raid' I would assume this
M> info would be returned if you did an image restore. If however you
M> simply restored data I would think there would'nt be a problem
M> I will, in the next couple of days be replacing my Sil raid controller
M> with an Adaptec. I had mirror raid. I propose, in the first instance to
M> break the origonal mirror, shutdown, disconect one sata and boot to the
M> other. assuming everything is ok, I'll install adaptec reboot update the
M> firmware/drivers then shutdown, connect the single sata to the Adaptec
M> reboot and test. If all ok connect 2nd sata, reboot and build the
M> mirror. I'm simply trying to avoid reinstalling everything, as I have
M> full onsite and offsite backups I'm not to bothered about data loss. -
M> I'm a bit paranoid re data, as to date I've lost three hd's
M> ??>> Hello, MrGrumpy!
??>> You wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2005 18:08:19 GMT:
??>>
??>> Fortunately, or unfortunately, I'm not concerned about the old array.
??>> Let
M> me
??>> rephrase that - based on my limited knowledge I don't THINK I
??>> concerned. I've got the whole Array backed up to an image file so I
??>> can restore it. I think I've already destroyed the raid0 array since I
??>> created the 2 raid0+1 disks. Having said that it may be that if I were
??>> to create the 2 disk
M> array
??>> via a different controller my backup restore would be worthless?
??>>
??>> Thanks.
??>>
??>> ColBlip.
??>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>
M>>> Excepting if the raid has been built a different raid controller may
M> not
M>>> see the raid, and if it does it may corrupt the raid. - Info from
M>>> Adaptec, further they state if changing raid controller, sys must be
M>>> rebuilt as otherwise they cannot guarantee the raid -
??>>
M>>> ??>>>> Being one for testing/experimenting, I would beg, borrow or steal
M> an
M>>> add-on
??>>>> Raid card (Adaptec, Promise etc.)
??>>>> Disable the on-board controll in the BIOS and then retest.
??>>>>
??>>>> MS
??>>>> ??>>>>> Hello, MrGrumpy!
??>>>>> You wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:11:42 GMT:
??>>>>>
??>>>>> Your note prompted me to try this again since deleting the raid0
??>>>>> array
M>>> and
??>>>>> recreating a couple of raid0+1 drives. Still doesn't see the
M> drives.
??>>>>>
??>>>>> Thanks.
??>>>>>
??>>>>> ColBlip.
??>>>>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>>>>
M>>>>>> According to Hitachi web site their diagnostics support Serial ATA,
M>>> if
M>>>>>> the tool is not finding your drives something is not quite right.
M>>>>>> I certainly had no trouble with a Samsung diagnostics testing my
M>>> Serial
M>>>>>> drives, and finding one failing.
M>>>>>> Asus have acknowledged problems with Sil controller on earlier
M> bios -
M>>> I
M>>>>>> know this is not relevant, just shows that Asus have had problems
M>>> with
M>>>>>> raid controllers.
??>>>>>
M>>>>>> ??>>>>>>> Hello, MrGrumpy!
??>>>>>>> You wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2005 08:21:22 GMT:
??>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>> I had done this before even starting the thread. These are
M> Hitachi
??>>>>>>> deathstars but the diagnostic they provide doesn't find a SATA
M>>> array
??>>>>>>> on my m/b, only the other 4 IDE devices (PATA) I have running off
M>>> of
??>>>>>>> the two m/b connectors.
??>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>> Thanks.
??>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>> ColBlip.
??>>>>>>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>>>>>>
M>>>>>>>> The hard disk manufacturers disk diagnostic checking utility.
M> They
??>>>>> are
M>>>>>>>> freely available from the hd manu. web site. Very usefull for
M>>>>>> diagnosing
M>>>>>>>> hd problems, and can in some cases reserect an apparently failed
M> hd
??>>>>> to
M>>>>>>>> enable data to be recovered. Which might be usefull, in your
M> case,
M>>>>>> since
M>>>>>>>> you have chosen to impliment a raid level which has no fault
M>>>>>> tollerance.
M>>>>>>>>
http://www.acnc.com/raid.html
??>>>>>>>
M>>>>>>>> ??>>>>>>>>> Hello, MrGrumpy!
??>>>>>>>>> You wrote on Fri, 15 Apr 2005 22:08:51 GMT:
??>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>> Sorry, what is the "hd manu checking utility on the hd's"?
??>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
??>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>> ColBlip.
??>>>>>>>>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>>>>>>>>
M>>>>>>>>>> Before you get to tech, you've ran the hd manu checking utility
M>>> on
M>>>>>> the
M>>>>>>>>>> hd's?
??>>>>>>>>>
M> message
M>>>>>>>>>> ??>>>>>>>>>>> I recently installed two SATA 80 gb drives as RAID0. All was
??>>>>> going
??>>>>>>>>>>> well
M>>>>>>>>>> for
??>>>>>>>>>>> about a week. Checks on the speed of the drive came out in
M> the
M>>> 70
M>>>>>>>> mb/s
??>>>>>>>>>>> range. Then I began to have problems with what can best be
M>>>>>> described
??>>>>>>>>>>> as "hesitation". Checking the array showed it was going down
M> to
M>>>>>>>> about
??>>>>>>>>>>> 1
M>>>>>>>>>> mb/sec
??>>>>>>>>>>> and then up to 60 mb/sec range and then back down again. The
M>>> peak
M>>>>>> to
??>>>>>>>>>>> peak cycle was maybe 15-20 seconds.
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> I then started chasing the problem to see if it was a HD or
M> MB
??>>>>>>>>>>> problem.
M>>>>>>>>>> Here
??>>>>>>>>>>> is what I found. I deleted the RAID0 and created two RAID 0+1
M>>> so
??>>>>> I
??>>>>>>>>>>> could look at them independently. I call the m/b connectors T
M>>> and
M>>>>>> B
??>>>>>>>>>>> and the
M>>>>>>>>>> drives
??>>>>>>>>>>> d1 and d2. I checked each of the drives/connections
M> separately
M>>>>>> (i.e.
??>>>>>>>>>>> first connecting T to d1 and testing and T to d2, etc). Here
M>>> are
M>>>>>> my
??>>>>>>>>>>> results
M>>>>>>>>>> where
??>>>>>>>>>>> OK is normal consistently high performance and not ok is
M> cycle
M>>> in
M>>>>>>>> the
M>>>>>>>>>> drive:
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> Tests with both drives connected:
??>>>>>>>>>>> T to d1 OK
??>>>>>>>>>>> B to d2 Not OK
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> T to d2 OK
??>>>>>>>>>>> B to d1 Not OK
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> B to d1 Ok
??>>>>>>>>>>> T to d2 Not OK
??>>>>>>>>>>> (note - may have written down results on last test in
M> reverse)
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> Tests with only one drive connected:
??>>>>>>>>>>> T to d1 OK
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> B to d1 OK
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> T to d2 OK
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> B to d2 OK
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> My conclusion from all of this is that the m/b has a RAID
M>>> problem
M>>>>>>>> that
M>>>>>>>>>> only
??>>>>>>>>>>> shows up when both drives are connected. Could someone who
M>>> knows
M>>>>>>>> this
M>>>>>>>>>> stuff
??>>>>>>>>>>> better than me (which is probably most people here) comment
M> on
M>>>>>> this
??>>>>>>>>>>> and whether the conclusion is likely valid or did I break
M> some
M>>>>>> rule
M>>>>>>>> of
??>>>>>>>>>>> connecting these things that makes the testing invalid.
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> If this approach is not valid, suggestions on some other way
M> to
M>>>>>> get
M>>>>>>>> to
??>>>>>>>>>>> the bottom of the problem?
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> ColBlip.
??>>>>>>>>>>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure
M>>>>>> Usenet
M>>>>>>>>>> News==----
??>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the
M> World!
??>>>>>>>>> 120,000+
M>>>>>>>>>> Newsgroups
??>>>>>>>>>>> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via
M>>>>>>>> Encryption
M>>>>>>>>>> =----
??>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure
??>>>>> Usenet
M>>>>>>>> News==----
??>>>>>>>>>
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
??>>>>>>> 120,000+
M>>>>>>>> Newsgroups
??>>>>>>>>> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via
M>>>>>> Encryption
M>>>>>>>> =----
??>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure
M>>> Usenet
M>>>>>> News==----
??>>>>>>>
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
??>>>>> 120,000+
M>>>>>> Newsgroups
??>>>>>>> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via
M>>> Encryption
M>>>>>> =----
??>>>>>
??>>>>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure
M> Usenet
??>>>>> News==----
??>>>>>
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
??>> 120,000+
??>>>>> Newsgroups
??>>>>> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via
M> Encryption
??>>>>> =----
??>>>>
??>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
M> News==----
??>>
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+
M> Newsgroups
??>> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
M> =----
