From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Oct 14 19:00:03 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2BCA16A422 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 19:00:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gary@tbe.net) Received: from kerplunk.tbe.net (kerplunk.tbe.net [209.123.115.134]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 780AF43D58 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 18:59:59 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gary@tbe.net) Received: by kerplunk.tbe.net (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C25DE5CE5; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 14:56:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kerplunk.tbe.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 865AA5CB5; Fri, 14 Oct 2005 14:56:36 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 14:56:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gary D. Margiotta" To: Vladimir Konrad In-Reply-To: <1129299724.1317.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20051014144820.D19176@kerplunk.tbe.net> References: <1129279679.1317.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <003b01c5d0a3$a6250da0$0200a8c0@bennypc> <1129283233.1315.33.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20051014091016.J71298@kerplunk.tbe.net> <1129299724.1317.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: MULTIPART/MIXED; BOUNDARY="0-1854671563-1129316196=:19176" Cc: Benny Goemans , freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sil3114 versus sil3114a X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 19:00:04 -0000 This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1854671563-1129316196=:19176 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE > is the man page for the driver out of sync (5.4, 6-current) ?: > > HARDWARE > The hptmv driver supports the following ATA RAID controllers: > > =B7=09 HighPoint's RocketRAID 182x series > > so it does suport 18x0 and 18x0A (that is my understanding from the > posts)? (it does according to highpoint but not according to the man > page) > > i was not planning to buy hardware raid solution but the price is not > that bad (considering that i can plug it to the existing machine now and > having it running in a new motherboard later). I won't go as far as to say that the 1820 is definitely supported, as I=20 don't know exactly, but you could probably look through the driver source= =20 for our ATA system to see if the card ID is present, and then you'd know=20 for sure. I would personally think that the 1810 would be supported, as=20 it's probably all int he same family of cards, so it's probably not too=20 different to support all revisions. However, I'm not a coder, so I don't= =20 want to give you bad advice. The one benefit of the hardware raid card, as opposed to the 'software=20 raid' ones, is that if my motherboard fails, I can in theory pull out the= =20 raid card and drives, move them into another system, and boot back up=20 without missing a beat, since the raid metadat and config is contained on= =20 the actual card, and not controlled by a software driver or the operating= =20 system. I've known others to have reported that this is easy, and does=20 work fine, but I have no personal experience (yet) on that one. Plus,=20 with true hardware, you obviously get the performance gains as well, since= =20 you can (as is the case with my setup) use a lower standard system and=20 CPU, since the hardware card does all the hard work for you, and you don't= =20 rely on the local system CPU to do it. > > well, the card is likely to move to and AMD64 bit machine i am planning > to buy in about a year. > That will probably result in one quick system, I'd love to see performance= =20 numbers on that just to drool over. > > thank you all very much for responding, especially pointing to me that > the sil chip-sets are not that good. it would be great if the (S)ATA > maintainer summarised his opinions somewhere ;-). > You're welcome, I hate to have someone buy a solution that's not optimal,= =20 and end up havnig troubles with it down the road, and have wasted money=20 and time on a solution when it could be avoided from the start. And, actually, if you search the -current mailing lists, you'll see plenty= =20 of Soren's gripes about the crappiness of the SiI cards when he was=20 writing support for them. I've been tracking -current for a few years=20 now, and that's how I know to avoid those cards. Also, I haven't looked=20 yet to confirm, but I'd bet that the ATA code is probably peppered with=20 "choice comments" about what he needed to do to get the card to work. Good luck... :) > > vlad > -Gary --0-1854671563-1129316196=:19176--