Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 18:44:52 -0700 From: Chris Wasser <cwasser@v-wave.com> To: "J. Maynard Gelinas" <mgelinas@bbn.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re[2]: Problems writing a disklabel/filesystems to Chaparral RAID Message-ID: <2781.991130@v-wave.com> In-Reply-To: <199911302202.RAA04686@bbn.com> References: <199911302202.RAA04686@bbn.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 on 11/30/1999 3:02 PM, mgelinas@bbn.com wrote: > The RAID takes a straight SCSI U2W differential interface; it should be OS > agnostic. As I wrote, the drives are also SCSI -- and I'm sure they work > fine individually. Ah, I must have missed you saying that, I apologize. > The vendor didn't claim it should be set it ID 0, he claimed it should be > set to LUN 1 and *NOT* LUN 0, which is altogether a different issue. > Currently the RAID is set to ID 1, LUN 0... though I tested it at LUN 1 (for > shits and grins), configured and built a FreeBSD kernel to support this, and > experienced the same problem. IMNSHO SAG (our vendor) is full of it. Argh, my bad. I haven't had alot of experience with RAID units by and large but I've dealt with truckloads of SCSI setups (usually external boxes or just your average run-of-the-mill controller+drive(s) setup) and basing my next comment on that, isn't ID 0 usually reserved for the controller? At any rate, I apppear to be clouding the issue more then helping it so I'll gracefully back out :) Sorry to have led you astray :) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.5i iQA/AwUBOER9lHkOgeFubyAgEQIBqgCfUWbxcDmrklpN93neaFiVEk8DT+oAn1gt c/74to/o1DT3xhlT2r+7rzkP =03v4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2781.991130>