Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 11:38:52 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= <sos@DeepCore.dk> To: Eirik Oeverby <ltning@anduin.net> Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: atacontrol and creating raid-1 arrays Message-ID: <4146BC2C.80604@DeepCore.dk> In-Reply-To: <4146BB3E.2070804@anduin.net> References: <8AA611E5-05B1-11D9-831C-000D9335BCEC@anduin.net> <414695D0.1020202@DeepCore.dk> <4146BB3E.2070804@anduin.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Eirik Oeverby wrote: >> Since the RAID metadata has to be put on disk it wont work if you have >> that area used for real data. Depending on what controller you use the >> metadata can be stored in different places. Other than that it works >> if you are *sure* the disks are identical (dd with a decnet blocksize >> is *much* faster tha cp). > > Yea, I used dd (blocksize 256kbyte proved optimal; ~40mbyte/sec) for my > final operation; was testing with cp first to make sure. This is a > Silicon Image SATA RAID controller which isn't supported by the ATA > driver in RAID mode, so it's purely software. Which, according to > another reply I got, uses the last 255 sectors on the disk. These were > already free, so I just tested - seems to work fine. Fsck has no > complaints. Other things I should do to verify? The Silicon Image SATA "RAID" controller is supported by ATA, and it has *NO* RAID capabilities whatsoever, its all done in software, I just dont support the particular metadata format that your BIOS uses. Now that said metadata can take anywhere from 1 to 17 sectors either in the front (old HPT) or the end (Promise/LSI/native) of the disk. Anyhow if ataraid picks it up etc you should be fine :) -Sørenhelp
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4146BC2C.80604>