From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 24 18:56:52 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3DE416A41C for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 18:56:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kirk@strauser.com) Received: from kanga.honeypot.net (kanga.honeypot.net [208.162.254.122]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C42743D1D for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 18:56:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kirk@strauser.com) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kanga.honeypot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE4D6222400 for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:56:51 -0500 (CDT) Received: from kanga.honeypot.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (kanga.honeypot.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 83442-11 for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:56:49 -0500 (CDT) Received: from janus.daycos.com (janus.daycos.com [204.26.70.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by kanga.honeypot.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4BF3321CFDA for ; Tue, 24 May 2005 13:56:49 -0500 (CDT) From: Kirk Strauser To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 13:56:38 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.8 References: <429340EC.2080801@shadowguarddev.com> In-Reply-To: <429340EC.2080801@shadowguarddev.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart4565803.isVfcmgf9Q"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200505241356.39253.kirk@strauser.com> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at honeypot.net Subject: Re: Hardware RAID Cards.. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 May 2005 18:56:52 -0000 --nextPart4565803.isVfcmgf9Q Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Tuesday 24 May 2005 09:57, Aaron C. Meadows wrote: > My question is, since that chipset is unsupported for hardware RAID, > would I be better off to software RAID them, or get a different RAID > card? What RAID level do you plan on using? Mirroring shouldn't use much CPU, fo= r=20 example, but parity might put a bit of a load on a hard-working system. That's a good question, though. Several cards are listed in the hardware=20 compatibility notes, but they stop short of saying "this card is completely= =20 supported" or "stay away from this one". What cards have people had good=20 luck with in practice? =2D-=20 Kirk Strauser --nextPart4565803.isVfcmgf9Q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iD8DBQBCk3jn5sRg+Y0CpvERAmmnAJ91lDg03pLq0y5c7ltkO+VfKJww3ACfYNOx iR9QHORRDqCABVOnTbWAsbw= =FLlO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart4565803.isVfcmgf9Q--