3310 RAID + 3310 Expansion + SunFire 440 Question?

HI all, I am new here.
I just set up my first SunFire 440 database server with one 3310 RAID (12 x 36GB) controller and one EXPANSION (12 x 36GB) controller.
I am using the Ultra3 SCSI PCI card (with the most recent drivers). Updated solaris 9 patch cluster. Updated 3310 firmware (I think it is 325W or something like that) and patches. Single Bus setting where one 3310 is used for expansion and the other used for RAID. The set up is just like the "Quick Install Guide" in Single Bus setting. The two 3310 arrays were used.
Question: How do I reset each 3310 disk array config? is it the sccli "reset nvram" command?
I can only see one 3310 when I do the sccli command. It does not give me the option to select the 2nd 3310 (therefore I wasn't able to upload the new 325 firmware). I don't think my servers see it. When I run the ssconsole, it only sees one 3310. Where is my 2nd 3310? I am thinking that I messed up with the physical SCSI connections in the rear panel of the 3310 for single bus in RAID and EXPANSION setting. Can someone tell me how they set it up or tell me what I am doing worng? Or Could it be the /kernel/config (something like that) where I add the LUN number... can someone tell me what that is for? Is LUN only for FC or can SCSI use it to?
Thank you for your time.
-Tony

OKAY. Forget the question above. I found some the Configuration User Guide that will help me set up RAID and Logic Drives.
BUT I still can't see all 24 hard disk (12 hard disk on each array) using the Quick Install Guide for "Connecting Cables for Single Bus Configuration." I can see 12 hard disk on channel 0 and 6 hard disk on channel 2. When I do a show disk, I get
sccli> show disk
Ch Id Size Speed LD Status IDs Rev
0 0 33.92GB 160MB ld1 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0ANJ4
0 1 33.92GB 160MB ld1 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APCR
0 2 33.92GB 160MB ld1 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APCL
0 3 33.92GB 160MB ld1 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APEE
0 4 33.92GB 160MB ld1 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APDN
0 5 33.92GB 160MB GLOBAL STAND-BY FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APDV
0 8 33.92GB 160MB ld0 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0AP9N
0 9 33.92GB 160MB ld0 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APRC
0 10 33.92GB 160MB ld0 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APTL
0 11 33.92GB 160MB ld0 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0AP85
0 12 33.92GB 160MB ld0 ONLINE FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APR8
0 13 33.92GB 160MB GLOBAL STAND-BY FUJITSU MAP3367N SUN36G 0401
S/N 00N0APEL
2 0 33.92GB 160MB ld2 ONLINE SEAGATE ST336607LSUN36G 0507
S/N 3JA6RJBF00007424
2 1 33.92GB 160MB ld2 ONLINE SEAGATE ST336607LSUN36G 0507
S/N 3JA29KTX00007402
2 2 33.92GB 160MB ld2 ONLINE SEAGATE ST336607LSUN36G 0507
S/N 3JA29F3G00007402
2 3 33.92GB 160MB ld2 ONLINE SEAGATE ST336607LSUN36G 0507
S/N 3JA6RKVJ00007424
2 4 33.92GB 160MB ld2 ONLINE SEAGATE ST336607LSUN36G 0507
S/N 3JA6RMEN00007425
2 5 33.92GB 160MB GLOBAL STAND-BY SEAGATE ST336607LSUN36G 0507
S/N 3JA6RK2B00007424
What happened to channel 2 hard drives 8-13??
I read on another post use command "drvconfig;devlinks;disks" but I can't find any info on that command.
Thanks.
-Tony

Similar Messages

Running Oracle on Dell 2850 against sunFire 440

Is there any reliable comparison about running Oracle (9i or 10g) on a sunFire 440 as compared to Dell 2850 or 6650 PowerEdge (2 way Xeon #Ghz) running Linux? I have seen many benchamrks but they are mostly obsolete, not on these models, and not DB relevant.

Is there any reliable comparison about running Oracle (9i or 10g) on a sunFire 440 as compared to Dell 2850 or 6650 PowerEdge (2 way Xeon #Ghz) running Linux? I have seen many benchamrks but they are mostly obsolete, not on these models, and not DB relevant.

RAID 5 - hardware vs software questions

Hi all,
Im thinking about building a RAID 5 server. Right now I have a Thecus 1U4500 (4x500GB RAID5) and I really like it but have outgrown it. And really I would rather build my own just for the fun of it.
I would like 8-12 drives, and RAID 5 or 6.
Here come the questions...
The Thecus server is software RAID 5, I think 1.XX GHz celeron and 512MB RAM. It has decent performance (at least for what I use it for).
So hardware RAID, expensive for 8-12 drives of RAID 5 or 6. Although it seems like it would be pretty easy to set up as long as there are appropriate Linux drivers. If I went with hardware RAID, how easy is it to expand the volume? I would have to use LVM to make this possible correct?
Software RAID, I have read up a little on EVMS. I am a little confused about it though. Does EVMS just use plugins for its functions? Does it use some other system to control a RAID volume?
I think I would run the OS (Arch) on a dedicated drive, perhaps a small flash disk or something, then just have my data on the RAID volume. If I do it this way, and I corrupt my OS somehow, will I be able to reinstall the OS and get my RAID functioning again? There is no software RAID that supports RAID 6 is there? Can hot spare be supported in RAID 5 on software?
At the moment I am leaning towards software RAID... if nothing else just to see if I can do it. But you guys with experience, how much processing power would I be looking at needing for 8-12 drives? Or is that many just out of the question with software?
Thanks!!

Unless you get some very expensive hardware raid, use software. I don't need to say any more Jeff Garzik sums it up perfectly in this message and the included links. I know little about raid, but not many know more than Jeff about using it under linux.
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/ … /2811.html
James
Last edited by iphitus (2007-07-20 08:50:29)

XServe Early 2008 (MA882LL/A) + RAID card SAS drive capacity question

I've tried searching the web and support forums, but haven't been able to find a clear answer to the following question:
I have an XServe Early 2008 (MA882LL/A) with the Apple RAID card and three 73GB SAS ADMs. It's been working great for the last two years. I'm about to upgrade it to 10.6 Server, and if possible would like to swap in larger drives at the same time (since it'll be down for an afternoon anyway). However, only 73GB and 300GB SAS ADMs were ever offered for this model, and Apple says that the Promise 450GB ADM is not compatible with it. What I can't determine is whether I can put a larger drive (notably, a Seagate ST32000444SS) into the Apple ADM sled. The RAID controller seems to have no problem with large SATA drives in the SATA sleds, which seems like a good sign, but I'd rather not order $1K worth of new drives and discover in the data center that they don't work.
Does anyone know definitively whether or not larger drives will work in SAS ADMs with this model of XServe? The RAID controller firmware is current (hardware rev 1.0.0, firmware rev M-2.0.3.3), if that makes a difference. I've read all the docs I can fine--I'd be happiest with an "I tried it and it did/didn't work" kind of answer .
Thanks much,
Amanda Walker
Reston, VA

Good morning
I am watching this thread as well. I have two of the same servers (without the RAID card) and have wondered the same thing as I migrate to Snow Leopard and as my data drives continue to fill up. Apple techs and local service techs have not been willing to endorse Amanda's solution for me and have stuck to the Apple Drive Compatibility chart which certifies 73 and 300 GB SAS drives only for this model XServe.
Thanks for any info you might provide.
Greg
PS Amanda, I would be interested in one of your 73GB SAS drives in an ADM as a boot drive should you decide to surplus one or two of your drives.

RAID PCI Necessary (and another question)

Good Morning,
I just ordered an XServe with 3x80GB drives. I did not order the RAID PCI card.
Is the RAID PCI card necessary if I want to Mirror the boot drive to one of the other 2 drives in the Xserve?.
Also, If I were to setup up the 3 drives as RAID 5 configuration, how much usable drive space should I expect to have available?
(I also ordered an Xserve RAID with 4x500 GB drives. I will have 2 sets of mirrored drives from that for data storage)
Thanks very much

>Is the RAID PCI card necessary if I want to Mirror the boot drive to one of the other 2 drives in the Xserve?.
Necessary? no.
Mac OS X can handle RAID 0 (striping) and RAID 1 (Mirroring) out of the box.
The Hardware RAID card can do RAID 0, RAID 1 and RAID 5, so you only need the card if you want RAID 5.
Note that the card can also do RAID 0 and RAID 1 and should be faster since it offloads the work from the main CPU, but it isn't necessary.
>Also, If I were to setup up the 3 drives as RAID 5 configuration, how much usable drive space should I expect to have available?
The general rule is that RAID 5 uses one drive for parity, so for a RAID 5 array with n drives you end up with a capacity of ((n-1) * drive size).
So in this case, with three 80GB drives you get (3 -1) * 80, or about 160GB of usable space.
>(I also ordered an Xserve RAID with 4x500 GB drives. I will have 2 sets of mirrored drives from that for data storage)
That's not the optimal use of 4 drives in the XServe RAID.
With two sets of mirrors drives I assume you're intending to create two 500GB mirrored volumes which results in 1TB of usable space.
Compare that with a four-drive RAID 5 set which yields 1.5TB of usable space. You get 50% more volume that's still RAID protected against a drive failure.
OK, you might tolerate two drive failures in the mirrored scenario, but you'll have to decide whether that minor advantage outweighs the additional space.

Adding 146GB drives to StorEdge 3310

I have a StorEdge 3310 with 6 72GB drives in it (RAID 10). Customer wants to add a pair of 146GB drives to increase capacity. Is there any issue with having disparate sized drives in a 3310 RAID array?

I have a 3310 disk array with 12 72gb drives ,
configured raid 5 , 1 hot spare...The host side scsi
parms are max queded i/o 256, luns /host 32, max #
concurent host lun 128, cyl/head/sector
cyl-65536,head-64, sector-255...... NO problems.
I have added a 3310 expansion unit to the original
disk array. expansion unit also configured raid5 ,
one local spare. sd.conf also update. I am able to
newfs, mount and use the disk. however it odd
compared to othe disks when using the solaris format
command. questions are the OK for 146gb drives. I
noticed that one of the options for cyl/head/sector
was variable. does anyone have experience using the
option???

GT70 question (Super Raid card)

Hello All!
Quick question, I'm interested in the new GT70 2PE-1069NL (1x 128GB msata SSD) or the GT70 2PE-1063NL (2x 128GB msata SSD).
Now, I'm wondering if the 1069 already features a Super RAID 2 expansion bay, so I can add my own msata SSD if I want to.
The difference between the two is €200,- and I'm wondering if it's worth the RAID 0 setup and the 4GB RAM extra. The 1063 also features a Blu ray player, but I won't use that.
Also, what msata SSD is in the 1069 and 1063?
Thanks in advance!

Quote from: Ragaroah on 02-April-14, 05:26:24
Hello All!
Quick question, I'm interested in the new GT70 2PE-1069NL (1x 128GB msata SSD) or the GT70 2PE-1063NL (2x 128GB msata SSD).
Now, I'm wondering if the 1069 already features a Super RAID 2 expansion bay, so I can add my own msata SSD if I want to.
The difference between the two is €200,- and I'm wondering if it's worth the RAID 0 setup and the 4GB RAM extra. The 1063 also features a Blu ray player, but I won't use that.
Also, what msata SSD is in the 1069 and 1063?
Thanks in advance!
Most likely they BOTH have the mSATA SuperRaid2 card.
For the €200, I would go for it. 4 GB more RAM, another 128 GB SSD, and a blue ray player to me makes it worth it.
No idea regarding what SSD or chipset it uses. It can vary from notebook to notebook since they will (most likely, I don't know this for sure...just guessing) probably buy whatever they can get for the cheapest.
Most likely it will be a SF2281 based card though. Atleast, that's my guess.

To RAID or not to RAID, that is the question

People often ask: Should I raid my disks?
The question is simple, unfortunately the answer is not. So here I'm going to give you another guide to help you decide when a raid array is advantageous and how to go about it. Notice that this guide also applies to SSD's, with the expection of the parts about mechanical failure.
What is a RAID?
RAID is the acronym for "Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks". The concept originated at the University of Berkely in 1987 and was intended to create large storage capacity with smaller disks without the need for very expensive and reliable disks, that were very expensive at that time, often a tenfold of smaller disks. Today prices of hard disks have fallen so much that it often is more attractive to buy a single 1 TB disk than two 500 GB disks. That is the reason that today RAID is often described as "Redundant Array of Independent Disks".
The idea behind RAID is to have a number of disks co-operate in such a way that it looks like one big disk. Note that 'Spanning' is not in any way comparable to RAID, it is just a way, like inverse partitioning, to extend the base partition to use multiple disks, without changing the method of reading and writing to that extended partition.
Why use a RAID?
Now with these lower disks prices today, why would a video editor consider a raid array? There are two reasons:
1. Redundancy (or security)
2. Performance
Notice that it can be a combination of both reasons, it is not an 'either/or' reason.
Does a video editor need RAID?
No, if the above two reasons, redundancy and performance are not relevant. Yes if either or both reasons are relevant.
Re 1. Redundancy
Every mechanical disk will eventually fail, sometimes on the first day of use, sometimes only after several years of usage. When that happens, all data on that disk are lost and the only solution is to get a new disk and recreate the data from a backup (if you have one) or through tedious and time-consuming work. If that does not bother you and you can spare the time to recreate the data that were lost, then redundancy is not an issue for you. Keep in mind that disk failures often occur at inconvenient moments, on a weekend when the shops are closed and you can't get a replacement disk, or when you have a tight deadline.
Re 2. Performance
Opponents of RAID will often say that any modern disk is fast enough for video editing and they are right, but only to a certain extent. As fill rates of disks go up, performance goes down, sometimes by 50%. As the number of disk activities on the disk go up , like accessing (reading or writing) pagefile, media cache, previews, media, project file, output file, performance goes down the drain. The more tracks you have in your project, the more strain is put on your disk. 10 tracks require 10 times the bandwidth of a single track. The more applications you have open, the more your pagefile is used. This is especially apparent on systems with limited memory.
The following chart shows how fill rates on a single disk will impact performance:
Remember that I said previously the idea behind RAID is to have a number of disks co-operate in such a way that it looks like one big disk. That means a RAID will not fill up as fast as a single disk and not experience the same performance degradation.
RAID basics
Now that we have established the reasons why people may consider RAID, let's have a look at some of the basics.
Single or Multiple?
There are three methods to configure a RAID array: mirroring, striping and parity check. These are called levels and levels are subdivided in single or multiple levels, depending on the method used. A single level RAID0 is striping only and a multiple level RAID15 is a combination of mirroring (1) and parity check (5). Multiple levels are designated by combining two single levels, like a multiple RAID10, which is a combination of single level RAID0 with a single level RAID1.
Hardware or Software?
The difference is quite simple: hardware RAID controllers have their own processor and usually their own cache. Software RAID controllers use the CPU and the RAM on the motherboard. Hardware controllers are faster but also more expensive. For RAID levels without parity check like Raid0, Raid1 and Raid10 software controllers are quite good with a fast PC.
The common Promise and Highpoint cards are all software controllers that (mis)use the CPU and RAM memory. Real hardware RAID controllers all use their own IOP (I/O Processor) and cache (ever wondered why these hardware controllers are expensive?).
There are two kinds of software RAID's. One is controlled by the BIOS/drivers (like Promise/Highpoint) and the other is solely OS dependent. The first kind can be booted from, the second one can only be accessed after the OS has started. In performance terms they do not differ significantly.
For the technically inclined: Cluster size, Block size and Chunk size
In short: Cluster size applies to the partition and Block or Stripe size applies to the array.
With a cluster size of 4 KB, data are distributed across the partition in 4 KB parts. Suppose you have a 10 KB file, three full clusters will be occupied: 4 KB - 4 KB - 2 KB. The remaining 2 KB is called slackspace and can not be used by other files. With a block size (stripe) of 64 KB, data are distributed across the array disks in 64 KB parts. Suppose you have a 200 KB file, the first part of 64 KB is located on disk A, the second 64 KB is located on disk B, the third 64 KB is located on disk C and the remaining 8 KB on disk D. Here there is no slackspace, because the block size is subdivided into clusters. When working with audio/video material a large block size is faster than smaller block size. Working with smaller files a smaller block size is preferred.
Sometimes you have an option to set 'Chunk size', depending on the controller. It is the minimal size of a data request from the controller to a disk in the array and only useful when striping is used. Suppose you have a block size of 16 KB and you want to read a 1 MB file. The controller needs to read 64 times a block of 16 KB. With a chunk size of 32 KB the first two blocks will be read from the first disk, the next two blocks from the next disk, and so on. If the chunk size is 128 KB. the first 8 blocks will be read from the first disk, the next 8 block from the second disk, etcetera. Smaller chunks are advisable with smaller filer, larger chunks are better for larger (audio/video) files.
RAID Levels
For a full explanation of various RAID levels, look here: http://www.acnc.com/04_01_00/html
What are the benefits of each RAID level for video editing and what are the risks and benefits of each level to help you achieve better redundancy and/or better performance? I will try to summarize them below.
RAID0
The Band AID of RAID. There is no redundancy! There is a risk of losing all data that is a multiplier of the number of disks in the array. A 2 disk array carries twice the risk over a single disk, a X disk array carries X times the risk of losing it all.
A RAID0 is perfectly OK for data that you will not worry about if you lose them. Like pagefile, media cache, previews or rendered files. It may be a hassle if you have media files on it, because it requires recapturing, but not the end-of-the-world. It will be disastrous for project files.
Performance wise a RAID0 is almost X times as fast as a single disk, X being the number of disks in the array.
RAID1
The RAID level for the paranoid. It gives no performance gain whatsoever. It gives you redundancy, at the cost of a disk. If you are meticulous about backups and make them all the time, RAID1 may be a better solution, because you can never forget to make a backup, you can restore instantly. Remember backups require a disk as well. This RAID1 level can only be advised for the C drive IMO if you do not have any trust in the reliability of modern-day disks. It is of no use for video editing.
RAID3
The RAID level for video editors. There is redundancy! There is only a small performance hit when rebuilding an array after a disk failure due to the dedicated parity disk. There is quite a perfomance gain achieveable, but the drawback is that it requires a hardware controller from Areca. You could do worse, but apart from it being the Rolls-Royce amongst the hardware controllers, it is expensive like the car.
Performance wise it will achieve around 85% (X-1) on reads and 60% (X-1) on writes over a single disk with X being the number of disks in the array. So with a 6 disk array in RAID3, you get around 0.85x (6-1) = 425% the performance of a single disk on reads and 300% on writes.
RAID5 & RAID6
The RAID level for non-video applications with distributed parity. This makes for a somewhat severe hit in performance in case of a disk failure. The double parity in RAID6 makes it ideal for NAS applications.
The performance gain is slightly lower than with a RAID3. RAID6 requires a dedicated hardware controller, RAID5 can be run on a software controller but the CPU overhead negates to a large extent the performance gain.
RAID10
The RAID level for paranoids in a hurry. It delivers the same redundancy as RAID 1, but since it is a multilevel RAID, combined with a RAID0, delivers twice the performance of a single disk at four times the cost, apart from the controller. The main advantage is that you can have two disk failures at the same time without losing data, but what are the chances of that happening?
RAID30, 50 & 60
Just striped arrays of RAID 3, 5 or 6 which doubles the speed while keeping redundancy at the same level.
EXTRAS
RAID level 0 is striping, RAID level 1 is mirroring and RAID levels 3, 5 & 6 are parity check methods. For parity check methods, dedicated controllers offer the possibility of defining a hot-spare disk. A hot-spare disk is an extra disk that does not belong to the array, but is instantly available to take over from a failed disk in the array. Suppose you have a 6 disk RAID3 array with a single hot-spare disk and assume one disk fails. What happens? The data on the failed disk can be reconstructed in the background, while you keep working with negligeable impact on performance, to the hot-spare. In mere minutes your system is back at the performance level you were before the disk failure. Sometime later you take out the failed drive, replace it for a new drive and define that as the new hot-spare.
As stated earlier, dedicated hardware controllers use their own IOP and their own cache instead of using the memory on the mobo. The larger the cache on the controller, the better the performance, but the main benefits of cache memory are when handling random R+W activities. For sequential activities, like with video editing it does not pay to use more than 2 GB of cache maximum.
REDUNDANCY(or security)
Not using RAID entails the risk of a drive failing and losing all data. The same applies to using RAID0 (or better said AID0), only multiplied by the number of disks in the array.
RAID1 or 10 overcomes that risk by offering a mirror, an instant backup in case of failure at high cost.
RAID3, 5 or 6 offers protection for disk failure by reconstructing the lost data in the background (1 disk for RAID3 & 5, 2 disks for RAID6) while continuing your work. This is even enhanced by the use of hot-spares (a double assurance).
PERFORMANCE
RAID0 offers the best performance increase over a single disk, followed by RAID3, then RAID5 amd finally RAID6. RAID1 does not offer any performance increase.
Hardware RAID controllers offer the best performance and the best options (like adjustable block/stripe size and hot-spares), but they are costly.
SUMMARY
If you only have 3 or 4 disks in total, forget about RAID. Set them up as individual disks, or the better alternative, get more disks for better redundancy and better performance. What does it cost today to buy an extra disk when compared to the downtime you have when a single disk fails?
If you have room for at least 4 or more disks, apart from the OS disk, consider a RAID3 if you have an Areca controller, otherwise consider a RAID5.
If you have even more disks, consider a multilevel array by striping a parity check array to form a RAID30, 50 or 60.
If you can afford the investment get an Areca controller with battery backup module (BBM) and 2 GB of cache. Avoid as much as possible the use of software raids, especially under Windows if you can.
RAID, if properly configured will give you added redundancy (or security) to protect you from disk failure while you can continue working and will give you increased performance.
Look carefully at this chart to see what a properly configured RAID can do to performance and compare it to the earlier single disk chart to see the performance difference, while taking into consideration that you can have one disks (in each array) fail at the same time without data loss:
Hope this helps in deciding whether RAID is worthwhile for you.
WARNING: If you have a power outage without a UPS, all bets are off.
A power outage can destroy the contents of all your disks if you don't have a proper UPS. A BBM may not be sufficient to help in that case.

Harm,
thanks for your comment.
Your understanding was absolutely right.
Sorry my mistake its QNAP 639 PRO, populated with 5 1TB, one is empty.
So for my understanding, in my configuration you suggest NOT to use RAID-0. Im not willing to have more drives in my workstation becouse if my projekts are finished, i archiv on QNAP or archiv on other external drive.
My only intention is to have as much speed and as much performance as possible during developing a projekt
BTW QNAP i also use as media-center in combination with Sony PS3 to run the encoded files.
For my final understanding:
C: i understand
D: i understand
E and F: does it mean, when i create a projekt on E, all my captured and project-used MPEG - files should be situated in F? Or which media in F you mean?
Following your suggestions in want to rebulid Harms-Best Vista64-Benchmark comp to reach maximum speed and performance. Can i use in general the those hardware components (exept so many HD drives and exept Areca raid controller ) in my drive configuration C to F. Or would you suggest some changings in my situation?

Cannot install Windows XP on MS-6330 w/RAID

Hardware:
MSI-6330 K7T Turbo Limited Edition w/RAID (latest BIOS - 3.6)
256MB Kingston (2 sticks of 133mhz 128mb, the recommended memory)
AMD Athlon XP 1800
Hercules 3D Prophet 4000XT (kyro chipset)
3COM 3C905B NIC
Standard CDROM and Floppy
x2 Maxtor 30gb Diamondmax Plus 8 HDD's
Before I begin, all parts (CPU, mem, etc.) is tested good in another system. Tested in system with a MSI-6330 K7T Turbo 2, tests pass, and XP installs without ANY hitch. I have also been a PC tech by trade for the last 8 years, not tooting my own horn, just letting you know I have tried everything I know. I have also tried searching the net, and this forum, and have'nt been able to come up with anything concrete.
So, Windows XP Pro will not install for anything. I have set the array, deleted array, tried drives on just the standard IDE channel. Tried just one HDD on array, then standard. Booted with fail-safe BIOS settings, etc etc. Tried everything.
Windows starts the install, feed it the drivers from MSI's site for the RAID (PDC20265R). From there, I get a variety of errors. Sometimes it will start and finish the format of the drive, sometimes it will error and say that the disk is corrupt (it's not). Sometimes it will finish formatting, copy some files, then say it can't copy. Sometimes it will just blue screen and give a "stop" error. The stop error has always been random, no particular one.
I sent this board back to the dealer and they said it is fine. But they had a drive with XP already installed, they didn't try a clean install. I did try putting one of the drives into my other system with the K7T Turbo 2, install XP, and installed the inf for the RAID on this board in question. Didn't think it would work, and it didn't.
ANYONE have a solution? Any ideas? I am at a brick wall. And really don't want to junk this board just to get another one and a PCI RAID card.

I am having very similar issues with the K7T Turbo-r limited edition(w/ raid) board. I tried to upgrade to bios v3.6 and the raid funtion failed to load and then would lock on the Windows XP screen. Did safe mode boot and locked up on gernuwa.sys. Went all the way back to bios v2.6 and worked my up to v3.1, where the problems started over again. v3.0 seems to work just fine. In v3.1 they changed the promise raid in the bios. I have downloaded the latest drivers for the raid on that board, but have not installed yet. To install these drivers, do I just right click on .inf file and install from there, or should I use the liveUpdate program to do it? I am hoping that these new drivers will fix the raid issues and allow me to upgrade to a newer bios.

Can I set up a RAID 1 Array by adding a drive to an existing install?

Hi All:
I have a K8N Neo2 with a 160GB Seagate SATA drive on it, and just bought an identical drive that I want to use for a RAID 1 array. My question is this: Do I need to do a complete reformat with the OS in order to setup RAID 1? With my old system and Ultra ATA drives, you could always add a drive, but I don't see any way to load the nVidia RAID driver after Windows has already been loaded.
Is this possible, and if so, what are the steps? I've enabled RAID for both SATA drives and can get into the RAID Bios, but beyond that, I'm lost. Also, I must have inadvertently setup an array, because it shows that I have one. I can boot into Windows if I turn off RAID in the BIOS, but would love to be able to install without a clean format.
Any help would be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Michael Tschirret

Michael,
You can create a RAID 1 Array, just make sure that the Drive with the Data is the Master and not the Mirror. You can have the RAID Controller build the image (Sync the Drives), and then you should be mirrored before you even boot back into Windows. The OS will not know the difference.
Take Care,
Richard

Raid configuration -- the elusive best practice/best value framework

After much research on RAID, both on and off the Apple site, I am still looking for answers. I searched RAID threads for thoughts on some of the top users in the Forum so I apologize, I am sure some of this seems old hat to you old Pros.
I just bought a Mac Pro. Haven't even fired it up yet because I want to get the storage issue (RAID 0 or 1, or 0+1) settled before I transfer my jpg and video files. I have pretty much decided against the expense of the Hardware RAID card when its performance seems somewhat less than rock solid (perhaps a myth). Anyway, with a 4-core PRO I assume (correct if I am wrong) that the CPU hit to do software RAID is reasonable.
Other Questions:
1) The single 640 Gb hard drive as retailed. Can I separate "Users and their jpg/video files" to a drive separate from the boot, OSX, and Applications? Is it advisable?
2) If #1 is recommended, should I then mirror the boot drive or simply Time Machine the backup of the single drive?
3) Somewhere someone suggested better performance by putting together drive 1 and 3, and drive 2 and 4? I don't recall if that approach was RAID 1 for drive 1&3 (mirroring the boot), and striped (RAID 0) for drive 2 and 4. Your thoughts on this -- assuming its even relevant based on your recommendation for the boot drive on question #1 and #2?
4) So at this point we're down to how we should use either the remaining two or three drive bays depending the choice taken with the boot drive. What is your recommendation for optimal value -- e.g. maximizing storage, data protection, and costs. Note: I am willing to purchase external drive(s) for Time Machine backup.
5) Name your top two or three internal and external drive picks for this arrangement.
Thanks much for your help on this. Anything else you'd like to suggest or question for clarification.
cougar90

Well, if you're going to be using the system for dual purposes, right off the bat maybe software raid is not for you (especially a 0+1). That's a lot of overhead to be dealing with: video editing plus users accessing files on the same comp.
If you have users needing to access files, I would keep the "video editing" system and "server" system separate.
Hatter's idea of a PC/Mac compatible NAS sounds good; very easy and affordable to implement. I only wonder about the speed, if you will be transferring large video files, and have multiple users connected at once (although if hatter recommended it, I'm sure it's fine). If you do go the NAS route though, make sure you have a gigabit network running. If you have any old computer system laying around (pc or mac), you can also configure that very easily as a server. Add hard drives or external enclosures for space. If it's a spare mac, and you have tiger 10.4, the app sharepoints works very well.
The PVR can be done on the Mac pro; keep it with the "video editing" system.
In regards to Raid card stability, I believe you were looking at the "Apple Raid Card" for the mac pro. Yes, there have been many problems with it regarding the battery. However this is pertaining to only the Apple raid card, NOT hardware raid in general.
There are other companies that put out very solid raid cards. Check the before link to www.amug.org, they are a great resource of raid info. On my setup, I use an ATTO Card connected to a D800RAID from Sonnet (mine is the previous model).
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/fusiondx800raid.html
http://eshop.macsales.com/item/ATTO/ESASR380000/
Also, before even attempting raid, get a good grasp on it.
http://www.acnc.com/040100.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RAID
Note RAID 5 needs Hardware Raid. Also if hardware raid is too expensive, you can also go with esata enclosures. This sonnet enclosure with esata card for example:
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/fusiond500p.html
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/temposatae4p.html
More affordable, with great performance. Use for Raid 0 scratch, temp files.

How to identify disk controllers on a sunfire V440

We want to use Volume Manager to stripe our disks on our sunfire 440. The Solaris Volume Manager Administration Guide said, "use disks that are each on different controllers to increase the number of simultaneous reads and writes that can be preformed." How can I determine that disks are on different controllers?
Thanks

give probe-scsi-all command at OK prompt. You will get all the SCSI devices connected to the controller. If no device is connected only controller address will be displayed. The controller address are in /devices directory. The /dev/dsk/cXtXdXsX files are mapped with /devices files. In which cX indicates controller id, you can find the controller number and its device address.
I hope this will fulfill your requirements.
thanks
bye
ravi

Possible to increase the total size of a software raid set?

Hi,
I need to increase the size of a software raid set which is internally in one of the Xserves - originally it had 2x 400G drives.
I've swapped drives into the raid so they are both now 500G drives.
diskutil info drive XX (ie raid set) shows that the raid is still a 400G raid volume as expected.
Question is - can I grow the Raid Total Size to use all the capacity of the member volumes?
I guess the alternative is to remove the drives from the raid, enable raid on one of them and then add the other drive as a member... but this would mean I would have to take the raid offline.
The raid sets are not my system disks.
Any clues?
TIA
Campbell
XServes Mac OS X (10.4.5) 12 Macs & far too many PCs

Thanks for your help.
I rebuilt the array using enableRaid. Worked fine with Raid Volume offline for approx 5 minutes - although I had to degrade the array (and go bare with no mirror) twice in the process.
In case anyone is interested, this is what the process was:
1 Swap into Raid array larger drive (say, disk 2) and let array rebuild
2 Disable file services.
3 removefromraid disk 2 (leave it mounted).
4 Unmount the raid set and eject drives (say, disk 1) Remove drive - it's the only original backup.
5 enableRaid on disk 2
Providing enableRaid is ok -
6 Insert a fresh larger size drive in the place of the removed drive (disk 1)
7 Unmount new drive and addToRaid
8 (Rebuild array). Providing rebuilding ok -
9 Start file services again.
Data, permissions & ACLs were all intact. So now users can fill the rest of the raid up with more MP3s this week <sigh>
Maybe not the best approach but it worked well for me.
XServes Mac OS X (10.4.5) 12 Macs & several hundred too many PCs

HP ProLiant ML110 G7 Intel Xeon E3-1220 RAID 1 with hot swap configuration

Dear All;
Am going to purchase 'HP ProLiant ML110 G7 Intel Xeon E3-1220' server partnumber '470065-591'. I want to know little more about its RAID controller. The above mensioned server having only two 500GB HDD. I want to configure RAID 1 on it and i want to add one more HDD 'HP 500GB 3G SATA 7.2K 3.5in MDL HDD' as hot swap for the RAID 1. here are my questions
1) it support RAID 1
i checked on few blogs. then i confirm I can configure RAID 10 with two HDD. so it will work same as RAID 1.
2) it will suport hot swap
actually first time am going to install RAID. Thats why am asking these questions.

Hi:
I recommend you also post your question in the HP Business Support Forum -- ML Servers section.
http://h30499.www3.hp.com/t5/ProLiant-Servers-ML-DL-SL/bd-p/itrc-264
Paul

Installing Oracle RDBMS on RAID

Oracle recommends to install
Database server on different
physicall device than OS
and database files on different device
than the database server.
I can't see how to use RAID technology
here, is it usable just for mirroring
e.g. datafiles, or can I install
it all to one disk array somehow
not to loose performance?
Thanks for advise a lot,
M.

Hi,
The usage of RAID is transparent to Oracle. You can find good notes about this one on Metalink :
30286.1 I/O Tuning with Different RAID Configurations.
38281.1 RAID and Oracle - 20 Common Questions and Answers
Nicolas.

3310 RAID + 3310 Expansion + SunFire 440 Question?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for