TS130 1106 - RAID

Hi, guys! I want to monitor the state of the RAID-array. The onboard-controller ist an Intel Desktop / Workstation / Server Express Chipset SATA RAID Controller; the operating system is Windows 2008 Server R2. On the download-pages from lenovo no software ist offered; and the latest software from Intel "PBG_RSTe_Drivers_GUI_CIM_CLI_3.1.0.1085_2012.04.24.zip" doen't run, although ist for w2k8. Any ideas? BTW: In the device manager I have one exclamation mark left "PCI Communikation Controller" from Intel with dev_ID 1C3A. What is this? Many thanks! Regards... Bjoern

Bottom line for fix, enable the .NET feature in Windows, then install the latest drivers directly from Intel.
See this post for more info --> http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/ThinkServer-Towers/TS130-RAID-Problems-with-Windows-Server-2008-R2-but-N...

Similar Messages

Drivers for Xenserver on TS130 Software/Onboard RAID

Inspired by the Intel Hybrid Cloud raid controller I ordered a TS130 w/16GB RAM and a couple enterprise 1TB drives, along with the Xeon cpu.
I configured the 2 1TB drives in a RAID 1 mirror and booted from Xen, but currently it sees the drives individually. Either Intel/Citrix/Lenovo has worked out a driver for this, or in their configuration they are using a sync or (gasp) no raid at all?!?!?!
Intel Hybrid Cloud - Lenovo System Options and Specs Here
Any advice? Really bummed out...

software raid on xenserver is not officially supported, but there is an unofficial guide to try to get it to work, but just a warning, it sounds like a bitch
http://blog.codeaddict.org/?p=5

TS130 Two sets of raid

Hi, i am running a ts130 (xeon) with two ssd's in raid 1 mirror...I want to add another two drives to run in raid 1 mirrors so i will have a total of 4 drives.I dont need the dvd drive so i can use that sata port.....can this be done?
Thanks for your help.

Should be possible yes. Just try it.
Disclaimer: While I do work for Lenovo Partner, all my contributions are my personal, non-official and not that of Lenovo or my employer.

RAID Management Software for TS130 (Windows Server 2008 R2)

Hello, I'm needing assistance locating RAID management software for the TS130 in Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard. In Device Manager, the drive has the following hardware ID: "IDE\DiskRAID11.0.00__". Does anyone know of a utility to check and monitor the health of this RAID array from within Windows?

Hi beau_goldkey,
Thank you for pointing out that we don't have the Intel RAID Management GUI software on the TS130 support page. We'll work on getting that resolved. In the meantime, the same software is used for the TS140 and can be found here.
I apologize for the inconvenience!

TS130 RAID Status

I am running Ubuntu 12.04 LTS Server on a headless TS130. I've got my operating system on a single SSD and my data on a RAID Array consisting of two 2TB drives in a RAID 1 configuration.
Everything is running perfectly, however I am wondering how I would know if there is a problem with the RAID Array... for instance if one of the drives failed and needed to be swapped out, how do I know? Ubuntu recognizes the drives as a RAID array, but there is not a "driver" or a utiility for checking the status of the hardware RAID Array.
Thanks in advance for your help!

I believe upon boot, it will flash a screen looking similar to your BIOS that gives the status of your raid configuration, It only holds for a few seconds but the text is either Green, Yellow, or I assume red based off of the status.

TS130 1105-19U RAID controller driver issues

I am trying to load WIndows 2008 Server Foundation on some ThinkServers. In a nutshell, after the Windows 2008 Foundation installer reboots, the server cannot find any bootable devices. I did this with the TS130 startup DVD, I did this manually loading the newest Intel driver and I tried this manually loading an older Intel driver. I even took the same driver that is used on another TS130 and that didn't work either.
I checked the RAID configuration and the logical drive exists.
Can someone recommend the exact driver I should be using for the Intel Rapid Storage Technology Controller or offer a suggestion on how to get Windows to recognize the controller?
thank you

Most recent BIOS must be installed and BIOS must be set to UEFI, not Auto or Legacy. It took me days to get mine to boot using dual 1.5TB drives. See this post --> http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/ThinkServer-Towers/TS130-RAID-Problems-with-Windows-Server-2008-R2-but-N...

TS130-11051CU Raid Storage Console

Anyone have any idea what Windows RAID Storage Console I can use to monitor within Windows 2008R2 Foundation? I have it all configured during bootup just fine, but would like to be able to monitor from with Windows. Especially helpful for Remote Administration...
Thanx in advance!
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Thanx for getting back to me.
Sorry, it is for the onboard Intel. I tried various versions of the RST (Rapid Storage Technology) and finally found this one here worked.
http://support.lenovo.com/en_US/downloads/detail.page?DocID=DS013896
However it didn't add in the "Service" & consequently I would get an error that the console couldn't connect to the service which wasn't even listed in the installed services. So I had to manually add the service by typing in the following at an elevated command window;
sc create "Intel RST DM Service" binpath= "c:\program files (x86)\intel\intel(r) rapid storage technology\iastordatamgrsvc.exe"
Then I had to insure that the “Intel RST DM Service” was set to Startup Type “Automated (Delayed Start)”
All is good now! I wanted to test it out on another system & I tried the same thing on my own server that I had been procrastinating on doing for quite some time now (Intel M/board with same Xeon processor & Intel C200 chipset) but didn’t have to manually add the service, it did it itself.

TS130 - Raid desync and failed

Hi
I got a error yesterday morning. Unable to boot on hdd. i verify the raid controller and i see in status failed. each drive have ' error occured (0) ' . i shutdown, reboot, enter in configuration utility raid. remove hdd , the failed one. reboot the server got windows server back on. i verify data written on them i see that everything written last friday have not been written (database and file and folders). i think for this peticular error friday, one hdd failed and raid havent been able to sync file to another one. but the failed one can be the one who have the most updated file on it ?.

I believe upon boot, it will flash a screen looking similar to your BIOS that gives the status of your raid configuration, It only holds for a few seconds but the text is either Green, Yellow, or I assume red based off of the status.

TS130 On board RAID

In the process of experimenting with/setting up a TS-130 with Win 2008 R2 with 500gb RAID1 using built in RAID.
I've been switching differnet drives in/out of the system after I had the RAID1 successfully working. I could plug in my test drives (either a single drive) or a pair of test RAID drives - and the server would boot.
On a few occassions, I plug the originall RAID back in and booted. However, now on two occassions I've plugged my original RAID drives back in and they would not boot. The first attempt was after installing a single drive for a Windows 2008 install. I was able to make the original RAID drives boot after I connected 2 test drives as RAID and did a Windows Server Restore. Once I remove the test RAID disks and connected the original RAID disk, the original RAID booted. I thought perhaps something in CMOS was wonky after having only a single drive connected.
I installed the test RAID drives for more testing and wanted to switch back to my original RAID - machine won't boot.
Onboard RAID screen show RAID is intact, but it won't boot. I have not tried reinstalling the test RAID disks and doing a Windows Server Backup restore. Actually I had just gotten done doing that.
Any ideas? It sounds like it's not wise to plug different drives into the server after the RAID has been configed.
Thanks!
Al
Solved!
Go to Solution.

accal wrote:
It sounds like it's not wise to plug different drives into the server after the RAID has been configed.
typically, yes. while arrays are usually mobile between controllers in the event of a failure, once the controller picks up the metadata it assumes you're leaving the array in place. the end result depends entirely on the controller. each act differently. pulling all disks of an array can flag a multi-disk failure and the controller will assume every drive died.
if you see an error after removing and replacing an array, try rebooting again to see if the array's metadata is picked up and applied. or, flag the array as offline and let it rebuild each time (albeit timely and tedious).
the best option is set up the array you want and let it run, assuming any "test" arrays created in the meantime via swapping physical disks will risk errors.

TS130 and Windows Home Server 2011

Hello,
Just got a New TS130 1105B2U and am curious if anyone has used Windows Home Server 2011. I did not see it on the list.
Also, I notice there is a 4TB cap on the drive support. Is that only for the hardware RAID support? Is it possible to install an additional drive controller in conjunction with the motherboard or is the cap based on the BIOS?
I looked around the forum but could not find an answer.
Thanks,
Paul

Hi Paul,
Lenovo never announced support for Windows Home Server 2011. As it was a consumer-oriented OS, it was not in-line with our strategy for those systems. WHS2011 runs on core of Windows Server 2008 R2 and is the close cousin of Windows Small Business Server 2011 Essentials, both of which are fully qualified for use on ThinkServer TS130. You should be able to find compatible drivers at support.lenovo.com using either of those as your match to get your server functional.
Support note: Lenovo would be unable to provide any level of support for the OS. This does not impact your hardware support. I'm going to guess you are familiar with these types of restictions since WHS2011 is only sold as an OEM licence.
As to your question about drive capacity, that must be an old revision of the manual. Lenovo has since annouced 3TB drives, making 6TB the maximum capacity by the system given Lenovo ThinkServer-branded options in a 2-bay system.
Below are the drives available for ThinkServer TS130:
0A89470
ThinkServer 500GB 3.5" 7.2K Enterprise SATA 6Gbps Cabled Hard Drive
0A89471
ThinkServer 1TB 3.5" 7.2K Enterprise SATA 6Gbps Cabled Hard Drive
0A89472
ThinkServer 2TB 3.5" 7.2K Enterprise SATA 6Gbps Cabled Hard Drive
0A89478
ThinkServer 3TB 3.5" 7.2K Enterprise SATA 6Gbps Cabled Hard Drive
Cheers!
Regards,
Nathan Miller
Enterprise S&P Product Manager
Enterprise Systems Group
Lenovo
ThinkServer is now on Twitter. We want to hear from you.
https://twitter.com/lenovoserver

TS130 Crash - HyperV - Windows 2008 R2 SP1

Hello,
Sry for my english. Im from germany.
We have a ts130 server with hyper-v windows 2008 r2 sp1 with two windows 2008 r2 sp1 vm's. We have 4 x 4 GB ram. The server run for the last 3 month, after complete new installation, without any problems, then the server crashes every day one time, without any information why. No image on scree, no reaction num key. We must do a hardreset...The onboard raid controller do a completed repair and review till 100% after starting windows and everything is fine. We become two new HDD's and we replace it. The server run 2 weeks and then crash, same problem. after every crash the onboard raid controller do a completed repair and review. Then lenovo replace the mainboard and the power unit with bios update, but the last 2 days, the server crash again one time a day.I dont know what we should do. Can anyone help us?
Peter

Hi, I have the same problem as you have.
Currently, I have Centos 6 installed with VirtualBox, but I have had this problem with other Ubuntus and Windows. After a while, sometimes 2 weeks, sometimes 2 hours, the system stop without showing any info on the screen and no reaction on keyboard (Bloq Num) as Cordial said. We have to do a hard reset and there is nothing in the linux logs, it only stops working.
I've try with soft raid, hardware raid, no raid, different HDDs, different OS, virtualization with VBox, KVM, VMWare VSphere, no virtualization, different RAM modules from different brands, a new power supply, changing BIOS options, ... Nothing solve the problem.
The integrated network card even blocked my switch when the server crash, so i start using a PCI one and disabled the integrated in the BIOS. The problem with the switch disapeared, but not the crash. At least other computers on the switch are working.
I've been trying to put this server in production for more than a year, but it's impossible.
Could somebody help with that? I've no idea what to do now.

How to: make one or two partions at a raid system?

Hey
how can i make one or more a partions at a raid system?
i will make the partions at a 250gb raid. one with 120gb for the bootsector, and the other for documents, etc.
is there a hwo to anywhere? dont find one?
please read my second question.... 2 raids at one mac pro?
regarads

O.K., i was looking the hole day to get that partions on a raid working.
to make the partions on each HD with the same volume, this is no problem. when you then create the first raid, works fine. but when you make the second raid, you get a massage, that this raid is not found.
then you see both raids at the disc utilty, but only at the first you seen the volumen down under, by the second not. the first works, the second is not avabiele.
so, now i have only one big mirrowed raid for my boot sector, and its runs fast, quick and without big noise... thats what i want, and the second big raid for my files.
2 raids at one mac pro with 4 hd. one with 2 x 250 gb hd for the bootsector, and the other with 2 x 500gb for files
thx to all, and you kappy
regards

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?

Intel Raid Vs Marvel Raid on Big Bang B3 Marshall (Non OS Drives) via win7 setup

I apologise in advance if this seems lazy but has anybody tried setting up RAID 1 mirroring of two non-essential data hard drives within Windows 7 64-bit as opposed to a bios setup?
I only need to mirror a games hard drive so as not to have to do manually backup the hard drive with Acronis software backup every other day or so.
I have a Acronis backup of the game hard drive as I am aware that creating a raid array on both drives will delete all data on both drives but I can restore my games software later.
As it was a non-essential raid array (non-OS drives) on my previous hardware setup for these two identical games drives before upgrading to the MSI big-band Marshall B3 I totally forgot to set up the raid whilst doing a fresh install of Windows 7 on a dual boot with a previously restored/Acronis universal restore of windows 7 which also had this raid array.
If that all makes sense I'm hoping you guys can put me in the right direction as to Intel on Marvel (I seem to remember reading in the past that Marvel Raid drivers had issues) preferences for a setup within Windows 7 64-bit rather than the bios setup which would mean starting from scratch which I'm not prepared to do on a non-essential, non-OS Raid array.
If however I was doing an essential OS drives Raid array then it's a no-brainer to do a BIOS setup with a fresh install.
Any thoughts much appreciated, cheers

I don't think you are looking at the right areas.
Quote:
Sonnet Tempo cards are compatible with most external SATA storage. However, external hard drives with USB 2.0/eSATA dual interface based on the Oxford Semiconductor OXU931DS storage controller chip may not be compatible with Mac OS X when connected via SATA. Known issues are kernel panics occurring when the drive is connected, or the drive not being recognized by the operating system.
Western Digital manufactures Desktop edition (WD Caviar, Caviar SE, Caviar SE16, and Raptor X) hard drives and Enterprise (RAID) Edition (WD RE, RE2, and Raptor) hard drives. Each type of hard drive is designed to work specifically in either a desktop computer environment, or connected to a RAID controller (hardware or software-based). If you intend to configure Western Digital drives in a RAID set, Sonnet and WD recommend using only their Enterprise edition hard drives. For more information, see this Western Digital FAQ.
EndQuote
http://www.sonnettech.com/product/temposatae4p.html
Not everyone follows guidelines like they use to. Enterprise and RAID Edition drives - even Green RE4 series - not noise. You want a good drive enclosure with adequate cooling from air flow and fans. These are not silent and any drive noise is just background hum and noise that they are working.
http://macperformanceguide.com/RecommendedESATAEnclosures.html
There are dozens of reviews on drive storage. If noise is over riding then you aren't a candidate for RAID, but you are for SSD and Green, and would find SilentPCReview up your alley.
http://www.silentpcreview.com/

WinXP-64 bit corrupts existing RAID array

I've got an MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum motherboard running Win XP Pro SP2 on two 36 gig SATA Raptors. Everything was working fine, but I wanted to try the 64 bit version of XP. Grabbed an old 80 gig PATA drive and threw that in the case. Unplugged the SATA drives so as not to risk messing with the existing working OS. Installed the latest 1218 x64 beta and it worked well.
The problem was that when I shut down and reconnected my old RAID array, windows wouldn't boot from it. I lost everything and had to rebuild Windows from scratch. So now I know to never unplug the SATA drives
Rebuilt WinXP on the RAID array and then tried rebooting with the PATA drive with the 64 bit OS. Came up with the "drive needs checking" screen, and proceeds to "fix" the RAID array while ignoring my frantic pounding on the Logitech USB keyboard to stop. Rebooted and yes, the new install was nuked. Okay, since it's gone anyway, reboot to the 64 bit OS and make sure it's got the 64 bit RAID drivers installed.
Reinstall WinXP on the RAID array, reboot to the 64 bit OS on the other drive and the same old scandisk comes and nukes it AGAIN!
So now the PATA drive is sitting on the shelf again, unless someone here can suggest what is causing this problem.
System Specs
Athlon64 3500
gig of PQI 3200 at 2-2-2-5 2.6
2x36 gig Raptors on ports 3-4
Plextor PX-716a DVD+_RW
Visiontek X800 Pro.

The first time you re-installed Win 32 on the raid that was a bit drastic. A repair ought to have done the job.
The problem was probably that you disconnected the array but that's where the boot.ini was and that file needed to be modified to add the path to the Win64 install.
Since you took out the array the Win64 install created a new boot.ini on the PATA drive. Even when you tell BIOS to boot off the array, Windows has a bad habit of looking at the IDE channels & using the boot.ini if it finds one there - but the file it found didn't point to the array of course.
So basically if you already have Win32 on the array I would leave that array connected normally when installing Win64 on the PATA drive and all should be well.
I've installed Win64 on the same array as my Win32 install and they co-exist happily. I reckon that's the most efficient way to do it. The main thing is to make separate partitions for Win32, Win64 and data files when you install Win32 in the first place. The two OSs can share the same data files, incuding stuff like email.

TS130 1106 - RAID

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for