From owner-freebsd-isp@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Mar 9 00:41:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27A1C16A4CE for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 00:41:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from power.connexus.net.au (power.connexus.net.au [203.12.22.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EC5E43D4C for ; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 00:41:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adrianl@connexus.net.au) Received: from NOTEBOOK.connexus.net.au (169-189.dsl.connexus.net.au [203.34.169.189])i298d5YT008305; Tue, 9 Mar 2004 19:39:05 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from adrianl@connexus.net.au) XAntiVirus: This e-mail has been scanned for viruses via the Connexus Internet Service Message-Id: <6.0.1.1.0.20040309193615.01ee6cd8@mail.connexus.net.au> X-Sender: adrianl@mail.connexus.net.au (Unverified) X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.1.1 Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 19:39:04 +1100 To: Karl Pielorz From: "Adrian @ Connexus" In-Reply-To: <61569656.1078821303@raptor> References: <6.0.1.1.0.20040309123150.01ddfd08@mail.connexus.net.au> <200403082323.10480.jromero@romero3000.com> <6.0.1.1.0.20040309152917.01f9c950@mail.connexus.net.au> <61569656.1078821303@raptor> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Best IDE RAID5 solution for FreeBSD 5.2 ? X-BeenThere: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Internet Services Providers List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2004 08:41:19 -0000 >At the risk of adding yet another "Quick Question" - if it's the same >channel that degrades - have you tried switching the channels over [Yes, I >know this requires someone on site to open/fiddle with the machine - and >switching the IDE cables over]? Yeah I tried that too... Basically no matter what the configuration of drives and ports I use, once it's degraded, I cannot rebuild the broken drive back in. >And, what's the state of the degraded drives afterwards - i.e. are they >really broken? [After having been tested/thrashed in a separate box to >verify it's condition?] No, the drive isn't broken - we've used the drives afterwards with no problems and have run sector scans on them.. Thanks Karl, Adrian.