Hello, Marc!
You wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2005 16:25:29 -0400:
I'm leery of adding anything like a new board to this one since so far I've
tried two different controller cards and neither of them worked. Looks like
I will go ahead and upgraded to a new m/b and athlon64 chip.
Thanks.
ColBlip.
E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
MS> MMmmm...too bad
MS> Adaptec makes the Serial ATA RAID 1210SA - which is approx. $50US.
MS> It will probably out-perform the one on your mobo.
MS> SIIG, Startech and Promise also makes them for slightly less.
MS> I'd buy the Adaptec - then you can use it with your drives in any
MS> (older) system.
MS> MS
MS> ??>> Hello, Marc!
??>> You wrote on Sat, 16 Apr 2005 13:20:08 -0400:
??>>
??>> I've got a promise controller that I think can do raid but not sata.
??>> I'm out of luck on laying my hands on a raid sata card. I'm the expert
??>> among my friends so that should scare you. <g>
??>>
??>> Thanks.
??>>
??>> ColBlip.
??>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>
MS>>> Being one for testing/experimenting, I would beg, borrow or steal an
MS>>> add-on Raid card (Adaptec, Promise etc.)
MS>>> Disable the on-board controll in the BIOS and then retest.
??>>
MS>>> MS
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
??>>>> and recreating a couple of raid0+1 drives. Still doesn't see the
??>>>> drives.
??>>>>
??>>>> Thanks.
??>>>>
??>>>> ColBlip.
??>>>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>>>
M>>>>> According to Hitachi web site their diagnostics support Serial ATA,
??>> 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 drives, and finding one failing. Asus have acknowledged
M>>>>> problems with Sil controller on earlier bios - I know this is not
M>>>>> relevant, just shows that Asus have had problems with raid
M>>>>> 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 Hitachi
??>>>>>> deathstars but the diagnostic they provide doesn't find a SATA
??>> array
??>>>>>> on my m/b, only the other 4 IDE devices (PATA) I have running off
??>> of
??>>>>>> the two m/b connectors.
??>>>>>>
??>>>>>> Thanks.
??>>>>>>
??>>>>>> ColBlip.
??>>>>>> E-mail: (e-mail address removed)
??>>>>>>
M>>>>>>> The hard disk manufacturers disk diagnostic checking utility. 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 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
??>> on
M>>>>> the
M>>>>>>>>> hd's?
??>>>>>>>>
M>>>>>>>>> message ??>>>>>>>>>> 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 the
??>>>>>>>>>> 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
??>>>>>>>>>> to
M>>>>>>> about
??>>>>>>>>>> 1
M>>>>>>>>> mb/sec
??>>>>>>>>>> and then up to 60 mb/sec range and then back down again. The
??>>>>>>>>>> peak
M>>>>> to
??>>>>>>>>>> peak cycle was maybe 15-20 seconds.
??>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>> I then started chasing the problem to see if it was a HD or MB
??>>>>>>>>>> problem.
M>>>>>>>>> Here
??>>>>>>>>>> is what I found. I deleted the RAID0 and created two RAID 0+1
??>> so
??>>
??>>>> I
??>>>>>>>>>> could look at them independently. I call the m/b connectors T
??>>>>>>>>>> and
M>>>>> B
??>>>>>>>>>> and the
M>>>>>>>>> drives
??>>>>>>>>>> d1 and d2. I checked each of the drives/connections separately
M>>>>> (i.e.
??>>>>>>>>>> first connecting T to d1 and testing and T to d2, etc). Here
??>> are
M>>>>> my
??>>>>>>>>>> results
M>>>>>>>>> where
??>>>>>>>>>> OK is normal consistently high performance and not ok is cycle
??>>>>>>>>>> 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 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
??>>>>>>>>>> problem
M>>>>>>> that
M>>>>>>>>> only
??>>>>>>>>>> shows up when both drives are connected. Could someone who
??>> knows
M>>>>>>> this
M>>>>>>>>> stuff
??>>>>>>>>>> better than me (which is probably most people here) comment on
M>>>>> this
??>>>>>>>>>> and whether the conclusion is likely valid or did I break some
M>>>>> rule
M>>>>>>> of
??>>>>>>>>>> connecting these things that makes the testing invalid.
??>>>>>>>>>>
??>>>>>>>>>> If this approach is not valid, suggestions on some other way
??>>>>>>>>>> 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
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
??>> 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>>>>> =----
??>>>>
??>>>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure 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
??>>>> Encryption =----
??>>
??>> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure 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 Encryption
??>> =----
