Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2005 14:56:36 -0400 (EDT) From: "Gary D. Margiotta" <gary@tbe.net> To: Vladimir Konrad <v.konrad@lse.ac.uk> Cc: Benny Goemans <benny.goemans@telenet.be>, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: sil3114 versus sil3114a Message-ID: <20051014144820.D19176@kerplunk.tbe.net> In-Reply-To: <1129299724.1317.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> is the man page for the driver out of sync (5.4, 6-current) ?: > > HARDWARE > The hptmv driver supports the following ATA RAID controllers: > > · 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 don't know exactly, but you could probably look through the driver source for our ATA system to see if the card ID is present, and then you'd know for sure. I would personally think that the 1810 would be supported, as it's probably all int he same family of cards, so it's probably not too different to support all revisions. However, I'm not a coder, so I don't want to give you bad advice. The one benefit of the hardware raid card, as opposed to the 'software raid' ones, is that if my motherboard fails, I can in theory pull out the raid card and drives, move them into another system, and boot back up without missing a beat, since the raid metadat and config is contained on the actual card, and not controlled by a software driver or the operating system. I've known others to have reported that this is easy, and does work fine, but I have no personal experience (yet) on that one. Plus, with true hardware, you obviously get the performance gains as well, since you can (as is the case with my setup) use a lower standard system and CPU, since the hardware card does all the hard work for you, and you don't 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 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, and end up havnig troubles with it down the road, and have wasted money 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 of Soren's gripes about the crappiness of the SiI cards when he was writing support for them. I've been tracking -current for a few years now, and that's how I know to avoid those cards. Also, I haven't looked yet to confirm, but I'd bet that the ATA code is probably peppered with "choice comments" about what he needed to do to get the card to work. Good luck... :) > > vlad > -Gary
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051014144820.D19176>