Drive status shown Unconfigured bad and Raid 10 volume degraded

Cisco UCS C200 M2 server one of the drive is showing Unconfigure bad and raid 10 volume degraded with long beeps and solid umber light. First I thought the hard drive is bad and replaced it with new one of same type. Did wait for rebulid for 5 days. Beep did not stop. Againg I looked in to the server and found the above status. Please refer the screen shot for more clarification of the error.
I was gong through Cisco documentation wherein I came across same type of error with bug and I am not sure its the same and is it is I did not understand the workaround I mean what to upgrade is it BIOS or firmware etc.

Mohammed,
What the bug is trying to say is that in a newer version (1.4(3c)) the behavior changes and the Physical Drive which was removed and inserted back shows the status "Missing" instead of showing up as "Unknown" under the Virtual Drive tab in CIMC as this is Unconfigured Bad drive and not part of the RAID group.
Now, the best you can do here is to monitor your system using CIMC, which is the tool we have to monitor/manage the C-Series server instead of vSphere itself.
To get rid of this behavior, you will have to enter into the WebBIOS (Control+H or C or M < Depends on what RAID controller you have), make the disk unconfig good, then make it only "online" so the disk can be part of the array again.
You may find out what is the sequence of keys you have to hit to ge to the controller during the server boot:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/unified_computing/ucs/c/hw/C200M1/install/c200M1/RAID.html
"Watch for the prompt for your controller during verbose boot:
•The prompt for LSI controller card utility is Ctrl-H.
•The prompt for the mezzanine-style controller cards is Ctrl-C.
•The prompt for the onboard Intel ICH10R controller utility is Ctrl-M. "
Note-1: It is important you first check that the disk has no errors before you try to re-add it to the array, cause if that is the case the disk will probably fail and data loss can occur.
Note-2:Once in WebBIOS, you can also disable the beeping alarm and here is the document that shows how that can be done from WebBIOS (note that this will be the interface if you had to press Ctrl+H, otherwise it will look different) or also, you can use MegaCLI to disable the alarm, and the below link also includes the necessary command:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/servers-unified-computing/ucs-c-series-rack-servers/116106-problem-ucs-lsi-beeps.html
In case you don't know how to set up CIMC in your C200, here is the link with images and the example, look for the C200 to get the correct steps/cabling:
http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/servers-unified-computing/ucs-c200-m1-high-density-rack-mount-server/111455-setup-cimc-c-series.html
I hope this helps.
Rate ALL helpful answers
-Kenny

Similar Messages

UCSM 2.1 Local disk configuration policy and raid volumes

Hi!
If i use Any configuration as local disk configuration policy and do the raid settings directly to the RAID-cards, am i able to have two raid volumes on C-series under UCSM management?
What i would like to do with C240M3 with 6 local disks: 2 disk raid1 and 4 disk raid0
So i would use:
"Any Configuration—For a server configuration that carries forward the local disk configuration without any changes."
As UCS servers Raid guide indicates:
"Maximum of One RAID Volume and One RAID Controller in Integrated Rack-Mount Servers
A rack-mount server that has been integrated with Cisco UCS Manager can have a maximum of one RAID volume irrespective of how many hard drives are present on the server. "
Is this paragraph limitation of GUI not able to set several volumes or hard fact without "Any configuration" workaround?

I did some testing about this issue:
Changed Local Disk Configuration to "Any Configuration"
Two virtual disks can be created from Raid card's WebBIOS
These disks are visible to RedHat Installation.
UCSM shows Any configuration for the Storage Local Disk policy
Actual Disk Configuration has faulty information - WebBios is the only place to check the RAID status?
Next step: I'll do the same for the production

RAID Volume Directory

I recently had a near melt down of an 8-disk RAID 5/0 volume. A G5 Mac running OS X Server 10.4.11 is the host.
These are Seagate drives that were struck with Seagate's firmware bug.
4 drives fell out of the volume, but after flashing all 8 drives in the RAID, 2 of the 4 failed drives came back. I have replaced the 2 drives that failed with new and the volume has rebuilt itself. Whew!
I am maintaining 2 backups with Retrospect 8 and another nightly sync with Carbon Copy Cloner.
Both Retrospect and Carbon Copy Cloner are reporting corruption with the same few files. These are unimportant files and deleting them is all I want to do. But I am unable to delete them.
One file is an old copy of iPhoto. When I try to empty the Trash I receive a "files are in use" message.
The other files are contained within a few deeply nested folders. When I click on those folders in the Finder they just disappear, however they do return by the next day. This folder disappearing is limited to these few folders. The rest of the RAID really seems to be healthy,
I suspect directory corruption due to bad blocks/sectors on the media.
I want to use Disk Utility to verify & repair the volume. I also want to use the HighPoint RAID tools to scan & map out the bad blocks on the media.
And here is where I am not sure on how best to proceed. Which should I do first?

I'd try deleting the files in Terminal. It doesn't care if the Finder thinks the file is busy. That might allow you to delete iPhoto anyway...
After that, I'd probably try Disk Utility first, followed by the RAID Tools.

Advice on RAID Sets, Volume Sets, and RAID Levels of the Volume Sets using an Areca Controller

I have read through a lot of information on disk usage, storage rules for an editing rig, users inquiries/member responses in this forum and I thank each and every one of you – especially Harm.
In building my new workstation, I purchased five (5) WD 1T, 7k, 64M SATAIII hard drives and an Areca RAID card, ARC-1880ix-16-4G, which I plan to use primarily as my media/data disk array. The workstation will use a 128GB SATAIII SSD as the OS/program drive and I will transfer two (2) WD Raptor/10k SATA 70GB drives from my current system for pagefile/scratch/render use. I tentatively plan on using a mobo SATAIII port for the SSD and mobo SATA ports with a software RAID (level 0) for the 10k Raptors.
In reading the Areca Instruction manual, I am now considering exactly how I should configure the 5 physical 1TB drives in terms of RAID Level(s), Volume Sets, and RAID Sets. I must admit that I like the opportunity of allowing for a Dedicated Hot Spare as I am generally distrustful of the MTBF data that drive vendors tout and have the bad experience in the past of losing data from a mal-configured RAID array and a single drive hardware failure (admittedly, my fault!).
In line with the logic that one doesn’t want to perform disk reading while trying to write at the same time (or vice-versa), I am thinking the approach above should work OK in using the mobo disk interface and both software and external hardware RAID controllers without having to create separate RAID level configurations within a Volume Set or further dividing up the physical drives into separate RAID sets. I know in forum messages that Harm noted that he had 17 drives and I could envision a benefit to having separate RAID sets in that situation, but I am not at that point yet.
To some degree I think it might be best to just create one RAID Level on one Volume Set on one RAID Set, but want to solicit thoughts from veteran controller users on their workflows/thoughts in these regards.
Anyone care to share thoughts/perspectives? Thanks
Bill

Thanks for the speedy feedback Harm - I appreciate it.
I was thinking RAID level 3 as well.
Of course, it's always something! I purchased the Caviar Blacks by mistake - which are non-TLER. I will work with EggHead to return the ones I purchased and replace them with RE4 versions as I'm not thrilled about the possibility of the controller declaring the volume/disks degraded unnecessarily and although I have the DOS utility WDTLER where one is supposed to be able to enable/disable TLER on WD drives - I suspect WD is way beyond that now anyway with current builds.
I agree with you about just testing the performance of the options for the raptors - on the mobo and then on the controller. When I benchmark them I'll post the results in case others are curious.
Thanks again....off to EggHead!

DIY Fusion Drive and RAID 5

Hi everyone!
I have spent several hours by reading various forums but haven’t found any definitive answers.
I have a 12 Core Mac Pro with the following setup: one 1TB SATA hard drive that carries the system and applications. For the files and storage there are three 2TB SATA drives in RAID 5 controlled by Apple RAID card. I am going to install a 512 GB Samsung 840 Pro SSD drive in the optical bay and have initially planned to use it just for the system and applications, but am curious if the following is possible.
1) Is it possible to combine the RAID 5 array with the SSD and create a Fusion drive?
2) If yes, will it retain all the features of the RAID 5?
3) Should TRIM be enabled?
Thank you in advance!

TRIM directly addresses the shortcomings of having only garbage collection available. SSD controller manufacturers and designers (including SandForce, the controller manufacturer for OWC's SSDs), recommends that TRIM be used with their products. So does Samsung.
For example, here's a 2011 article from OWC describing how you don't need TRIM on their SSDs and how it can in fact hurt performance or reliability.
That article has been discussed here on MacInTouch before. In my opinion it's bad advice, and inaccurate in some of its assertions. It also ignores the recommendation made by SandForce to use TRIM with their SSD controllers. But even if one were to take that article at face value, applying that advice to SSDs other than OWC's makes little sense.
The reason I'm advising against TRIM is simply that it's yet another driver-level modification of the OS, and these always carry potential risk (as all the folks with WD hard drives who lost data can attest to).
Apples and oranges comparison, for a variety of reasons. The short of it is that TRIM is supported natively in all recent versions of OS X. The tools used to enable it for third party SSDs do not add a new kernel extension; they change the setting to allow Apple's native TRIM implementation to be used with SSDs other than those factory installed by Apple.
This shows that the 840s do work slightly better with TRIM than without, but the differences are (in my opinion) trivial, a 9% increase at best.
One of the major reasons for the skepticism that exists about TRIM is that so many people, the authors of both articles you linked to included, don't understand it.
TRIM is not, strictly speaking, a performance-enhancement technology -- though it is plainly obvious that most people think it is.
Though it can, in many circumstances, improve performance, there are also circumstances under which it will provide little or no noticeable benefit. Not coincidentally, a new SSD tested fresh out of the factory packaging is unlikely to show much (if any) benefit. Or rather, TRIM is providing a real benefit for new SSDs, but that benefit doesn't become measurable in terms of benchmark performance testing until every memory cell in the SSD -- including many gigabytes of cells hidden from visibility by the SSD controller -- have been written to at least once. Writing 128 GB of files to an SSD with a nominal capacity of 128 GB won't do it, as there are several gigabytes (exact number varies depending on the model) still unwritten.
Under real-world use conditions, having TRIM disabled means eventually having noticeable write performance degradation due to write amplification. It is far greater than "9%" -- it can be a 50% or greater drop in write performance, depending on various factors. Defining "eventually" is difficult because it depends on how the SSD is used. But given enough time and write cycles, it can happen to all SSDs used without TRIM, no matter how sophisticated their garbage collection algorithms are.
Under those same real-world use conditions, having TRIM enabled means that the SSD should almost never reach a state of having noticeable write performance degradation, as it should almost never get into a state where write amplification is happening.
I will concede that it is possible to design a lab test in such a way as to defeat the benefits provided by TRIM, but such tests do not reflect any real-world usage scenario I can imagine. Furthermore, those same contrived tests would put an un-TRIMmed drive into an equally-addled state even more quickly.
I would suggest reading through the rather lengthy previous discussions about TRIM. Here are a couple of my past posts that are most relevant to the current discussion:
A description of what TRIM is here.
I addressed some of OWC Larry's comments about TRIM use with OWC/SandForce SSDs here.
http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/harddrives/index.html#d09dec2013

How to install the driver of the 'SCSI and RAID Host Controller'

Hi,
I have two Windows XP(32Bit) installations:
•Windows XP SP2(32Bit) which is old and it seems as if it is infected by some viruses.
•I have installed another fresh clean Windows XP(32Bit) SP3. However, I have found that there is no category named with ''SCSI and RAID Host Controller'. However, when checking out the old version of Windows XP, I found 'SCSI and RAID Host Controller'
is there. (Screen shot below)
The new Windows XP(32Bit) SP3, there is no 'SCSI and RAID Host Controller'
My motherboard is:
My Desktop Computer(Intel P 4, 512MB of RAM, and Graphics Card with 256MB of RAM.
]I am seeing that most computer doesn't has the scsi / raid controller . in the old Windows XP on my computer that SCSI and RAID controller exists, and it it has not a yellow mark on it.
When I installed a new windwos XP 32Bit SP3, no SCSI/RAID in divice manager .
My computer sound on new Windows XP doesn't work , however, on old Windows XP SP2 works well. I have a buitl-in sound card. SCSI and RAID controller category in the device manager on the old Windows xp SP2 is realted to sound card,I don't think.
Thus, What drivers would let the 'SCSI and RAID Host Controller' added in the device manager?
A man should convert his anger and sadness into strength to continue living in this life.

If you open the case and shine a light on the motherboard you can usually see both the manufacturers name and the model printed on the pcb somewhere. You should also normally see this information on the first POST screen when you turn on the PC.
Otherwise Google "775i65G" like I did.
Here are the driver downloads (assuming it is an Asrock 775i65G R2.0 and not an R3.0)
http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/775i65G%20R2.0/?cat=Download&os=XP
You should install the inf driver first. Hopefully after you do that you will see your desired listing in Device Manager.
With regard to the AMR driver and the HDMR driver, you can find some information about these here :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Audio/modem_riser
Unless you actually have something plugged into these risers, it is probably not necessary to install the drivers.
However, the drivers for the integrated C-Media audio chip and the Realtek Lan chip may prove useful.
It looks like the motherboard has integrated video but if you are using a graphics card it will not normally be necessary to install the VGA driver.
You can download both the manual and the installation guide here
http://www.asrock.com/mb/Intel/775i65G/?cat=Manual
And if "SCSI and RAID Host Controller" is still not shown in Device Manager, don't worry - because these functions are not supported by your motherboard (again assuming it is an Asrock 775i65G)
Thanks a lot,
First of all, when saying that I have multi-operationgs systems, I mean there are two operating systems installed on my PC(SP2, SP3) both are 32Bit. The first Windows SP2(NOT installed by me) has all multimedia audio card installed
well, and has SCSI and RAID Host Controller shown the device manager. However, only the VGA is not installed on Windows SP2. However, the second one Windows SP3(Installed by me) has VGA not installed, Multimedia audio NOT installed, and there is no SCSI and
RAID Host Controller in device manager.
First: Why did the CPUz, specy didn't detect motherboard name, and only detect the model. IF I need to open the case and shine a light on the motherboard you can usually see both the manufacturers name and the model printed on
the pcb somewhere, then what benfit would be there from hardware detection software?
Second: Yes, my motherboard has integrated video, and integrated audio card
However, this doesn't mean that I don't need to install them since the Vidoe controller is not properly installed (it is a default VGA ) Also, Multimedia audio controller is not functiong at all.
Finally: if And if "SCSI and RAID Host Controller" is still not shown in Device Manager in Windows XP SP3, because these functions are not supported by my motherboard, then why is 'SCSI and RAID Host
Controller' installed/shown in the device manger in Windows XP SP2 on the same PC???
A man should convert his anger and sadness into strength to continue living in this life.

Using separate drive for OS and RAID for data

We have an xServe with 3x1Tb drives set up as RAID 5. I read in one of the forums that it's not a particularly good idea to create separate OS/Apps and data volumes on it. Is there a way therefore of utilising a fourth drive and direcly attaching that as the bootable OS/Apps drive?
Is this possible? Is it a viable solution?

Hi
Yes it is possible, as a viable solution? It depends? I've done this a number of times with an external firewire drive that is the boot drive. FW800 is obviously quicker than FW400. Whichever it is you are adding latency nevertheless. Ultimately its better to do this with internal drives as they will always be quicker which you will see in improved server performance.
What I have done in the past is to RAID Mirror or Stripe (using DU) 2x500GB as well as 2x750GB and even 2x1TB drives. The other bay has a single 80GB drive as the boot drive. Clone this boot drive periodically to an external FW drive. If the boot drive fails, boot from the cloned FW drive. You can run the server like that until a replacement drive can be fitted. Clone back and you should be back to normal.
As you have a RAID card installed, for RAID 5 you need a minimum of three drives, there is not much scope as you have already filled up all your bays.
Tony

Working photographer needs help with hard drives and raid O decisions

Hi new here and also new to Mac well almost new been 20 years since i had a mac. i have a Mac Pro Book and this led to ordering the MacPro since I am a working photographer i made a complete switch in platforms so i have some questions and such but I did place a order on Friday for a 2.66 4gbs of Ram , 2 500 gb hard drive and a 30 in monitor and of course the ATI 1900 XT card so yes i am waiting like many for that card.
I put initial 4gb of ram since running CS2 will at least take a max of 3gb's in the memory cache . i plan on getting 2gbs more from OWC since that seems to be the only 3rd party ram at the moment that is working correctly from reading some of the threads here. Having 6gbs is a no brainer really given the amount of Raw processing that i do along with PS work plus having e-mail and other apps open at the same time. The ram to me is the easy part although expensive . My biggest issue is what to do with the 2 hard drive slots and Raid O or not but I will start a thread on that. But i will have 6gbs total for now and the bottom line is you can never have enough ram still holds true.
Now on to my diliemma with hard drives. I did have a raid O scsi 10k rapture and and 10 k scratch on my Dell box and I am just not sure what to do here. i ordered the 2 500 gb hard drive and I may just put them on the storage side of things than get 2 WD 150gb 10 k Sata drives. Now i could Raid O them for 300 gb and get a performace boast that way or i could keep them seperate and put everything on 1 150 drive and ue the second for scratch only. What i don't know is what Mac perfers and what works better. Not worried so much about failure of drives, thats just life in the big city stuff and you just have backups. What i more worried about is performance versus a waste . seems to me that Raid O may not even be needed with these new Intel boxes with all the horsepower going on. Now the other think I notice is the WD 150gb 10 k drives are 1.5 and not 3.0 so is it really faster than the 7200 3.0 single hard drives. I read barefeats shoot out and it seems just getting the right drives in 7200 and Raid O them maybe the answer.
Okay i am not the biggest geek on the planet but I do know my stuff but this is a area that i look for more knowledge on this. So if i can get some sound advice in this area. i know there are many photographers out there like me pushing hundreds of images that could use the same advice. Now let's leave the money end out , folks sometimes think more with there wallet than what works best not that I am opposed to saving money but after spending over 7 k already on this system it becomes a moot point. LOL
www.guymancusophoto.com

Ok your question is if you should RAID O the two 150GB Raptors or not.
I think it was wise for you to get a couple of them for a boot drive with "Time Machine" coming in the next version of Mac OS X. The second drive would make a excellent bootable backup and eliminating downtime if a boot drive dies on you one morning.
In fact any boot drive cloning software that is Mac Intel ready now would do you good.
Now Barefeats has run some tests, and I can pretty much back up what they say from my own experience.
Mac OS X and apps can be helped only so much by a faster boot drive, and a single 10,000 RPM Raptor is enough, RAID O a pair is overkill.
If you install everything on the boot Raptor and keep your space hogging files (except iTunes) in new folders on another drive, even a 7,200 RPM 500GB, the two drives combined is faster as there is nearly no wait. Both drives can be accessed at the same time. Keeping the boot drive slim keeps the stylus (arm) moving as little as possible to get all the small reads/writes Mac OS X needs.
I RAID O-ed my boot drives because 74GB was the largest they had at the time, so combining them gave me speed and larger storage. I hardly use the speed, it only comes in handy if by rare chance I duplicate a 20GB folder, then I can do it in half the time of a 7,200 RPM drive.
Some of the drawbacks of a RAID O set, especially as a boot drive is that I have to auto-clone the whole set to a external drive regularly (I actually do a couple). Since the data path is separated with a RAID O, any drive failure results in total data loss.
So if you RAID O those 150GB Raptors, your going to have to clone 300GB to a external drive (or another internal) regularly, like once a week. This will take considerable time and you can't use the machine while the cloning process is going on. Sure auto-cloning software like DeJaVu can be used at night/weekends, but why bother cloning more than you have to for no big speed increase?
However if your messing with huge Photoshop files that spill over your CS2 3GB RAM limit (you need to have a "scratch" thats as fast as RAM), duplicating large files and other heavy duty drive work, then a boot RAID O will come in handy. Just remember your initial performance of 185 MB p/s will drop about 20-25% when those drives are 3/4 filled. Still 140 MB p/s is extremely good and a no worry situation.
What is worrysome is anything below 80MB p/s (I'm talking uncached 4K write speeds under X-Bench) with a new boot drive and then as time elaspes that boot drive gets filled up and loses half or more of it's inital speed. 30 MB p/s is really slow. Beachball H&LL.
http://www.barefeats.com/hard33b.html
Do Erase W/Zero in Disk Utility all new drives before laying data on them. Drives get subjected to shock which causes bad sectors on the drive. Driver software uses your data as a guinea pig to test the sectors (which you might not be able to recover the file). Zeroing does this without your data, rewriting the bad sector map so your writes are much improved, OS is more stable. etc.

Unconfigured, Bad Status "A", Bad Status "B"

Greeting All.
I recently upgraded to LabVIEW 8.5.1, including LabVIEW-RT.
My application acquires data from an AI-110 -- Compact FP module.
Anyhow, to make a long story short, my program started to malfunction.
[After lots of pain and suffering,] I learned that the call fo FP Read produces the error:
Unconfigured, Bad Status "A", Bad Status "B"
The error is frequent, and I cannot help to think that it is considerably diminishing the performance of all other tasks.
Any Ideas?

Certainly.
Attached, you'll find a VI that resembles my worker-VI - which I use in my project.
I run this VI inside of a state machine.
It is initialized at the onset of execution.
Thereafter, it is called upon [to read data] at 2Hz.
The session is closed at the end.
Thanks.
Attachments:
ai110.vi ‏30 KB

Target Disk Mode with RAID Volume and Macbook Pro

I just received a MBP which I today intended to use to pull a netrestore image off our lab server. The latter is a Mac Pro with 2 RAID 1 arrays. I started the Mac Pro in target disk mode, hooked it up to the MBP and was expecting to see the RAID volumes to show up in the finder. Unfortunately nothing happened. I then started the disk utility only to find out that the volumes are shown but are not accessible.
Doing the same thing using our backup server (running OS X 10.4.8 server) works like a charm.
Is it possible that MBPs and/or the non-server version of OS X don't support target disk volumes off RAID arrays?
I used the same MBP as a target disk mode slave today and that, too, worked.

Hello BK:
Welcome to Apple discussions.
This knowledge base article will, perhaps, give you more information:
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=58583
Barry

Z77A-GD65: Disks shown but not selectable on creating a RAID volume

Mainboard: Z77A-GD65
CPU: Intel Core i7 3770K
RAM: 2x Corsair DDR3-1600 XMS3 4GB
HDDs: 2x Seagate Barracuda SATA3 7200.12 6GB/s
Upgraded System with new MB etc. yesterday and removed the old HDD.
After enabling RAID in BIOS, I went to the RAID settings with Ctrl+I. The RAID setup displays both HDDs with correct description and storage size, but when I was trying to create a new RAID volume the "disc selection" option is not selectable unless "Recovery" is chosen as RAID level. On RAID level "Recovery" both disks are selectable but no RAID volume is created during the process. When RAID level 0 or 1 is chosen still the correct size of the potential volume is calculated by the RAID setup.
Additionally, I tried the same procedure with both "RAID hot-plug" enabled and disabled in BIOS.
The HDDs are plugged into SATA-ports 1+2. No OS installed yet.

After several unsuccessful attempts of formatting and partitioning the disks, I installed the OS. Subsequent use of the thereafter installed Intel Rapid Storage Technology (IRST) enabled me to created the RAID volume under Windows, which is now additionally shown on the IRST page after the POST screen.
So the RAID volume creation worked, but it still takes me wonder why I haven't been able to do this after the POST screen in the first place .
Well, problem still kind of solved.

My hard drive went bad and I lost a lot of purchased items from the iTunes store. I want to re-download them but can not. They still show up on my purchased items. How do I solve this?

My hard drive went bad and I lost a lot of purchased items from the iTunes store. I want to re-download them but can not. They still show up on my purchased items. How do I solve this?

Update to iTunes 10.3.1
After you have finished, you can re download your iTunes purchases without having to re purchase.
iTunes 10.3.1
" Download Previous Purchases. Download your past music purchases again at no additional cost. Your purchases are available in the iTunes Store on your Mac or in the iTunes app on your iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch. Previous purchases may be unavailable if they are no longer on the iTunes Store."
"Available on iTunes in the U.S. and Canada only. Title availability is subject to change."
From here. http://www.apple.com/itunes/

I use an external hard drive for my Lightroom library and I notice that all the images shown on there are DNG. On my MAC hard drive I have images shown as NEF. I desperately need to free up space on my hard drive, can I safely delete these NEFs?

I use an external hard drive for my Lightroom library and I notice that all the images shown on there are DNG. On my MAC hard drive I have images shown as NEF. I desperately need to free up space on my hard drive, can I safely delete these NEFs?

dj_paige wrote:
however, I do point out that obtaining an additional hard drive and not throwing anything away seems a preferable solution to me.
heidie22, dj_paige has a very good point there. I would not through away the NEF files; I would archive them to a external drive.
By the way, I am assuming that converting RAW files to DNG is a decision you have made and not an accident.

How do I use WD Raptor for OS/Apps drive and RAID 0 for Home/Data drive

So far I have configured my machine with a WD Raptor 74GB as the startup disk, and created a RAID 0 with the Seagate 250 GB drive (shipped with the machine) and a 250GB partion of a WDC 320GB drive. All drives were zeroed and I used the install disks to load Tiger on the Raptor. I backed up to a LaCie D2 1TB external hard drive with LaCie's Silverkeeeper.
I would like to use the WD Raptor as startup/apps/scratch disk and the RAID 0 for the user folders and other data. I would then like to create a RAID 1 with the RAID 0 and a 500GB partion of the LaCie 1TB external.
I have learned however that what I would like and what I can have are not always compatible.
My questions:
Is the Silverkeeper backup sufficent, or should I have cloned my previous system?
What folders should accompany the application folder on the Raptor? So far I have only put the app folder there and nothing works. I suspect things like 'application support' should be there as well.
Is there a way to keep my home folder on the RAID 0 without using Terminal or spending too much time as the root user? I tried copying my home folder onto to the RAID 0 and putting an alias in the user account I had to create while installing the OS on the Raptor. This kind of works but is not a particularly elegant solution.
I would appreciate any advice on how to proceed or if the proposed configuration is even achievable.

Photoshop files of 1GB+ can eat up memory and scratch. And the more drives for scratch, the better.
Some of the limitations are with the bus, bandwidth, and 'swapping' code in and out of different cores that is inefficient.
Compilers can do some, but from the time new hardware (8 cores) to seeing improvements to compiler, and out to software (applications) and OS, can take a year or more but provide in the neighborhood sometimes of 40%. In which time, newer designs will change the equation. Caching and VM will improve with Leopard, but beyond that...?
So... back to "read world" IF you are in the habit of working with 1-2GB images, then a pair of Raptors for boot is helpful, AND 8GB and more of RAM, AND 4-8 drives for scratch. (Think of those Sonnet Port Multiplier controllers and Fusion 500 style case for 5 drives on one port).
If you work with files smaller than 500MB range, your needs are cut way down.
150GB Raptor boot drive. Small. subtract 25% for minimum free space, 140GB formatted, kind of tight for some. But it handles 60% well.
The outer 30% of 465GB (RE2) is also fast and good performance. I partition large boot drives to keep the OS and apps contained in the outer 1/3.
Mac Pro Memory Usage and Performance
If your work flow means doing more than one thing at a time on your Mac Pro, then you will see significant gains if you spend extra to get the 8-core version. Our Photoshop CS3 actions were completed 39% faster on the 8-core when we had 3 other apps busy crunching. This advantage emerges in spite of the memory bus limitations of the 8-core Mac Pro.
http://www.barefeats.com/octopro3.html
CS3: Justifying 8-Cores
http://www.barefeats.com/octopro4.html
Pshop Test G5 Quad 16GB Raptor RAID
Photoshop and multi-core
http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/
Mac Pro 2GHz 4GB 10K Raptor 23" Cinema Mac OS X (10.4.9) WD RE RAID Aaxeon FW800 PCIe MDD-G4 APC RS1500 Vista

I bought a brand new Mac 27" desktop that came loaded with Adobe CS6. Everything worked like a charm until the hard drive, 1Tb, developed a bad sector and the Apple Store reinstalled a new one as I had extended warranty with them. The recycled the drive i

I bought a brand new Mac 27" desktop that came loaded with Adobe CS6. Everything worked like a charm until the hard drive, 1Tb, developed a bad sector and the Apple Store reinstalled a new one as I had extended warranty with them. They recycled the drive immediately (like a fool I didn't ask for it back to get the data off it.) But luckily I have all my data on CrashPlan. I downloaded it and it worked great except I downloaded it to the desktop and not the original location so it got squirrely. I also have an external 1.5Tb drive that I wanted to make bootable so I installed Mavericks 10.9.3 . I then went ahead and installed it on the newly installed drive too.
I think that because I have a new drive Adobe thinks I have a news computer. I bought the 27" Mac brand new from Ebay and it came loaded with software, including CS6. I have a serial number for CS6 but Adobe said it wasn't valid. (I have owned CS2, CS4 and now CS6 which came preloaded onto the Mac by the seller who told me that the software was registered to the Mac???
I am going to re-download the backup but this time to the original location (I still don't think it will work with Adobe. What can I do about this?
iMac 27-inch, Late 2012
Processor 3.2 GHz Intel Core i5
Memory 32 GB 1600 MHz DDR3
Graphics NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX 1024 MB
Software OS X 10.9.3 (13D65)@

You need to contact Adobe Support either by chat or via phone when you have serial number and activation issues.
Here is a link to a page with options to help make contact:
http://www.adobe.com/support/download-install/supportinfo/

Drive status shown Unconfigured bad and Raid 10 volume degraded

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for