Carlos was right. . .

Discussion in 'Windows 64bit' started by Tony Sperling, Jan 3, 2007.

  1. Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!

    In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND 'Suse
    Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this is
    almost sca-a-a-ary!

    One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real live
    performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I had
    around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the theoretical
    300. Bottleneck gone!

    I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does show what
    kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but after
    having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that big a
    difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used to be so
    tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more just for
    the hell of it!

    Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With the
    MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?

    Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but this
    setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two running
    machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it practical at
    all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but backup
    data? The reverse of a file-server?

    Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it all to
    good use.


    (This was an extremely rewarding day!)


    Tony. . .
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 3, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Right!

    I'm not putting anything serious onto this for a while, I'll watch it for 2
    weeks, or something, before I settle in. Great fun, watching, though!

    Tony. . .


    "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Thanks, Tony!
    > I knew you would give RAID0 a shot one of these days.
    > Don't forget your regular backups, though!
    > Carlos
    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 3, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Tony Sperling

    Guest

    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    >
    > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND 'Suse
    > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this is
    > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    >
    > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real live
    > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I had
    > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the theoretical
    > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    >
    > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does show what
    > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but after
    > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that big a
    > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used to be so
    > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more just for
    > the hell of it!
    >
    > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With the
    > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    >
    > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but this
    > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two running
    > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it practical at
    > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but backup
    > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    >
    > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it all to
    > good use.
    >
    >
    > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .


    Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse 10.0
    system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is quite
    difficult.
     
    , Jan 3, 2007
    #3
  4. Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the CD/DVD
    in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you land in
    the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing Windows
    partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using up the
    rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home dir's size
    a bit and pressed 'O.K.'

    That's IT!

    This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported - others may
    not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM based
    RAID's.

    If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty much the
    same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    invention.

    Tony. . .


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > >
    > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND 'Suse
    > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this is
    > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > >
    > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real live
    > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I had
    > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the

    theoretical
    > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > >
    > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does show

    what
    > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but

    after
    > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that big

    a
    > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used to

    be so
    > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more just

    for
    > > the hell of it!
    > >
    > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With the
    > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > >
    > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but this
    > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two running
    > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it practical

    at
    > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but

    backup
    > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > >
    > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it all

    to
    > > good use.
    > >
    > >
    > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .

    >
    > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse 10.0
    > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is quite
    > difficult.
    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 3, 2007
    #4
  5. Tony Sperling

    Guest

    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the CD/DVD
    > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you land in
    > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing Windows
    > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using up the
    > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home dir's size
    > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    >
    > That's IT!
    >
    > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported - others may
    > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM based
    > RAID's.
    >
    > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty much the
    > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    > invention.
    >
    > Tony. . .


    I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    >
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > >
    > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND 'Suse
    > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this is
    > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > >
    > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real live
    > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I had
    > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the

    > theoretical
    > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > >
    > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does show

    > what
    > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but

    > after
    > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that big

    > a
    > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used to

    > be so
    > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more just

    > for
    > > > the hell of it!
    > > >
    > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With the
    > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > >
    > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but this
    > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two running
    > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it practical

    > at
    > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but

    > backup
    > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > >
    > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it all

    > to
    > > > good use.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Tony. . .

    > >
    > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse 10.0
    > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is quite
    > > difficult.
    > >
     
    , Jan 3, 2007
    #5
  6. Let's hear what you think!


    Tony. . .


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the

    CD/DVD
    > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you land

    in
    > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing

    Windows
    > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using up

    the
    > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home dir's

    size
    > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > >
    > > That's IT!
    > >
    > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported - others

    may
    > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM based
    > > RAID's.
    > >
    > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty much

    the
    > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    > > invention.
    > >
    > > Tony. . .

    >
    > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > >
    > >
    > > <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > >
    > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > >
    > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND

    'Suse
    > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this

    is
    > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > >
    > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real

    live
    > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I

    had
    > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the

    > > theoretical
    > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > >
    > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does

    show
    > > what
    > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but

    > > after
    > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that

    big
    > > a
    > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used

    to
    > > be so
    > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more

    just
    > > for
    > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > >
    > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With

    the
    > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > >
    > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but

    this
    > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two

    running
    > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it

    practical
    > > at
    > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but

    > > backup
    > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > >
    > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it

    all
    > > to
    > > > > good use.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony. . .
    > > >
    > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse

    10.0
    > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is

    quite
    > > > difficult.
    > > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 5, 2007
    #6
  7. Tony Sperling

    Guest

    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > Let's hear what you think!
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .


    I'm transferring files from one machine to the other at the moment
    before I do the install, which I assume has to be fresh given the major
    changes in file structures. [Man, I gotta get a gigabyte router. ;-) ]
    I already downloaded the opensuse iso.

    This is probably not the right forum, but I've yet to get windows
    networking to let me into my x64 machine. I can reach all my computers
    from x64, including samba on the linux box, but just can't get into the
    x64 no matter how I fiddle with the firewall. It's not a big issue
    since the computers are not far apart physically, but if I really
    wanted to pull something off the X64 box from another PC, I'd be up
    feces creek without a paddle. It has to do with the password for
    windows being different from logging in versus network access.

    >
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the

    > CD/DVD
    > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you land

    > in
    > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing

    > Windows
    > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using up

    > the
    > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home dir's

    > size
    > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > >
    > > > That's IT!
    > > >
    > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported - others

    > may
    > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM based
    > > > RAID's.
    > > >
    > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty much

    > the
    > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    > > > invention.
    > > >
    > > > Tony. . .

    > >
    > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND

    > 'Suse
    > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this

    > is
    > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real

    > live
    > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I

    > had
    > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the
    > > > theoretical
    > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does

    > show
    > > > what
    > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but
    > > > after
    > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that

    > big
    > > > a
    > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used

    > to
    > > > be so
    > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more

    > just
    > > > for
    > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With

    > the
    > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but

    > this
    > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two

    > running
    > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it

    > practical
    > > > at
    > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but
    > > > backup
    > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it

    > all
    > > > to
    > > > > > good use.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > >
    > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse

    > 10.0
    > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is

    > quite
    > > > > difficult.
    > > > >

    > >
     
    , Jan 5, 2007
    #7
  8. Tony Sperling

    Aaron Kelley Guest

    About the network, I've never had a problem networking with x64.
    I have had some silly issues when you were logged in as an account with the
    same name (but a different password) on the two machines you were trying to
    use. Only thing I can think of, thought I'd throw it out there.

    - Aaron

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Tony Sperling wrote:
    >> Let's hear what you think!
    >>
    >>
    >> Tony. . .

    >
    > I'm transferring files from one machine to the other at the moment
    > before I do the install, which I assume has to be fresh given the major
    > changes in file structures. [Man, I gotta get a gigabyte router. ;-) ]
    > I already downloaded the opensuse iso.
    >
    > This is probably not the right forum, but I've yet to get windows
    > networking to let me into my x64 machine. I can reach all my computers
    > from x64, including samba on the linux box, but just can't get into the
    > x64 no matter how I fiddle with the firewall. It's not a big issue
    > since the computers are not far apart physically, but if I really
    > wanted to pull something off the X64 box from another PC, I'd be up
    > feces creek without a paddle. It has to do with the password for
    > windows being different from logging in versus network access.
    >
    >>
    >>
    >> <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >> >
    >> > Tony Sperling wrote:
    >> > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the

    >> CD/DVD
    >> > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you
    >> > > land

    >> in
    >> > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing

    >> Windows
    >> > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using
    >> > > up

    >> the
    >> > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home
    >> > > dir's

    >> size
    >> > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    >> > >
    >> > > That's IT!
    >> > >
    >> > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported - others

    >> may
    >> > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM based
    >> > > RAID's.
    >> > >
    >> > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty much

    >> the
    >> > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    >> > > invention.
    >> > >
    >> > > Tony. . .
    >> >
    >> > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    >> > >
    >> > >
    >> > > <> wrote in message
    >> > > news:...
    >> > > >
    >> > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    >> > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND

    >> 'Suse
    >> > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man,
    >> > > > > this

    >> is
    >> > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    >> > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real

    >> live
    >> > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the
    >> > > > > disk +
    >> > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled,
    >> > > > > I

    >> had
    >> > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the
    >> > > theoretical
    >> > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does

    >> show
    >> > > what
    >> > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast,
    >> > > > > but
    >> > > after
    >> > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't
    >> > > > > that

    >> big
    >> > > a
    >> > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This
    >> > > > > used

    >> to
    >> > > be so
    >> > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once
    >> > > > > more

    >> just
    >> > > for
    >> > > > > the hell of it!
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need
    >> > > > > for
    >> > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'!
    >> > > > > With

    >> the
    >> > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but
    >> > > > > no
    >> > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's,
    >> > > > > but

    >> this
    >> > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two

    >> running
    >> > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it

    >> practical
    >> > > at
    >> > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing
    >> > > > > but
    >> > > backup
    >> > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting
    >> > > > > it

    >> all
    >> > > to
    >> > > > > good use.
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > >
    >> > > > > Tony. . .
    >> > > >
    >> > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse

    >> 10.0
    >> > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is

    >> quite
    >> > > > difficult.
    >> > > >
    >> >

    >
     
    Aaron Kelley, Jan 5, 2007
    #8
  9. Tony Sperling

    Guest

    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > Let's hear what you think!


    It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was recognized.
    I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64 bit
    Suse, but you probably guessed that.

    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the

    > CD/DVD
    > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you land

    > in
    > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing

    > Windows
    > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using up

    > the
    > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home dir's

    > size
    > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > >
    > > > That's IT!
    > > >
    > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported - others

    > may
    > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM based
    > > > RAID's.
    > > >
    > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty much

    > the
    > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    > > > invention.
    > > >
    > > > Tony. . .

    > >
    > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64' AND

    > 'Suse
    > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man, this

    > is
    > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB of
    > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real

    > live
    > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the disk +
    > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache enabled, I

    > had
    > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the
    > > > theoretical
    > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it does

    > show
    > > > what
    > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast, but
    > > > after
    > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't that

    > big
    > > > a
    > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This used

    > to
    > > > be so
    > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once more

    > just
    > > > for
    > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need for
    > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'! With

    > the
    > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but no
    > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's, but

    > this
    > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two

    > running
    > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it

    > practical
    > > > at
    > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing but
    > > > backup
    > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting it

    > all
    > > > to
    > > > > > good use.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > >
    > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse

    > 10.0
    > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is

    > quite
    > > > > difficult.
    > > > >

    > >
     
    , Jan 5, 2007
    #9
  10. That's great! I mean to keep a close look at his myself - so far, I'm happy
    as a hand in a barrel of tits.


    Tony. . .


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > Let's hear what you think!

    >
    > It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was recognized.
    > I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64 bit
    > Suse, but you probably guessed that.
    >
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > >
    > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick the

    > > CD/DVD
    > > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you

    land
    > > in
    > > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two existing

    > > Windows
    > > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions using

    up
    > > the
    > > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home

    dir's
    > > size
    > > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > > >
    > > > > That's IT!
    > > > >
    > > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported -

    others
    > > may
    > > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM

    based
    > > > > RAID's.
    > > > >
    > > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty

    much
    > > the
    > > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red Hat
    > > > > invention.
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony. . .
    > > >
    > > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > news:...
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64'

    AND
    > > 'Suse
    > > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh, man,

    this
    > > is
    > > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB

    of
    > > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of real

    > > live
    > > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the

    disk +
    > > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache

    enabled, I
    > > had
    > > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to the
    > > > > theoretical
    > > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it

    does
    > > show
    > > > > what
    > > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is fast,

    but
    > > > > after
    > > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't

    that
    > > big
    > > > > a
    > > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This

    used
    > > to
    > > > > be so
    > > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once

    more
    > > just
    > > > > for
    > > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no need

    for
    > > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy installation'!

    With
    > > the
    > > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind, but

    no
    > > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in *.ZIP's,

    but
    > > this
    > > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have two

    > > running
    > > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it

    > > practical
    > > > > at
    > > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve nothing

    but
    > > > > backup
    > > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of putting

    it
    > > all
    > > > > to
    > > > > > > good use.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a Suse

    > > 10.0
    > > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up is

    > > quite
    > > > > > difficult.
    > > > > >
    > > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 5, 2007
    #10
  11. Not unlikely! The ROM chip is supported and that covers several more layers
    of RAID sets.

    Tony. . .


    "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Are you sure it is RAID0+1?
    > Tony and I are working with RAID0 (byte stripping).
    > Carlos
    >
    > "" wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > Let's hear what you think!

    > >
    > > It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was recognized.
    > > I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64 bit
    > > Suse, but you probably guessed that.
    > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Tony. . .
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day - stick

    the
    > > > CD/DVD
    > > > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When you

    land
    > > > in
    > > > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two

    existing
    > > > Windows
    > > > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions

    using up
    > > > the
    > > > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the /Home

    dir's
    > > > size
    > > > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > > > >
    > > > > > That's IT!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported -

    others
    > > > may
    > > > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common ROM

    based
    > > > > > RAID's.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing pretty

    much
    > > > the
    > > > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a Red

    Hat
    > > > > > invention.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > >
    > > > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home', 'x64'

    AND
    > > > 'Suse
    > > > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh,

    man, this
    > > > is
    > > > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has 466MB

    of
    > > > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind of

    real
    > > > live
    > > > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what the

    disk +
    > > > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache

    enabled, I
    > > > had
    > > > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close to

    the
    > > > > > theoretical
    > > > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but it

    does
    > > > show
    > > > > > what
    > > > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is

    fast, but
    > > > > > after
    > > > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really isn't

    that
    > > > big
    > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing. This

    used
    > > > to
    > > > > > be so
    > > > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it once

    more
    > > > just
    > > > > > for
    > > > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel - no

    need for
    > > > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy

    installation'! With
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in mind,

    but no
    > > > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in

    *.ZIP's, but
    > > > this
    > > > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I have

    two
    > > > running
    > > > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust. Is it
    > > > practical
    > > > > > at
    > > > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve

    nothing but
    > > > > > backup
    > > > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of

    putting it
    > > > all
    > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > good use.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have a

    Suse
    > > > 10.0
    > > > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it up

    is
    > > > quite
    > > > > > > difficult.
    > > > > > >
    > > > >

    > >
    > >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 5, 2007
    #11
  12. Ah, yes - that's true, but in reallity, 0+1 should combine Stripe and Mirror
    and so, only show a minor slowdown for the processing and writing involved
    in the mirroring that is taking place. This will all happen concurrently,
    and will need a minimum (I think of 4 drives) it will have a speed-boost
    equal to a RAID0 of two discs minus something, if I'm not mistaken. And all,
    with the added security as a bonus.


    Tony. . .


    "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Tony:
    > What I wanted to mean is that only RAID0 provides the performance boost we
    > were both looking for.
    > Carlos
    >
    > "Tony Sperling" wrote:
    >
    > > Not unlikely! The ROM chip is supported and that covers several more

    layers
    > > of RAID sets.
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Are you sure it is RAID0+1?
    > > > Tony and I are working with RAID0 (byte stripping).
    > > > Carlos
    > > >
    > > > "" wrote:
    > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > Let's hear what you think!
    > > > >
    > > > > It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was

    recognized.
    > > > > I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64 bit
    > > > > Suse, but you probably guessed that.
    > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day -

    stick
    > > the
    > > > > > CD/DVD
    > > > > > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When

    you
    > > land
    > > > > > in
    > > > > > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two

    > > existing
    > > > > > Windows
    > > > > > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions

    > > using up
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the

    /Home
    > > dir's
    > > > > > size
    > > > > > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > That's IT!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported -

    > > others
    > > > > > may
    > > > > > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common

    ROM
    > > based
    > > > > > > > RAID's.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing

    pretty
    > > much
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a

    Red
    > > Hat
    > > > > > > > invention.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home',

    'x64'
    > > AND
    > > > > > 'Suse
    > > > > > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh,

    > > man, this
    > > > > > is
    > > > > > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has

    466MB
    > > of
    > > > > > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind

    of
    > > real
    > > > > > live
    > > > > > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what

    the
    > > disk +
    > > > > > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache

    > > enabled, I
    > > > > > had
    > > > > > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close

    to
    > > the
    > > > > > > > theoretical
    > > > > > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but

    it
    > > does
    > > > > > show
    > > > > > > > what
    > > > > > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is

    > > fast, but
    > > > > > > > after
    > > > > > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really

    isn't
    > > that
    > > > > > big
    > > > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing.

    This
    > > used
    > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > be so
    > > > > > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it

    once
    > > more
    > > > > > just
    > > > > > > > for
    > > > > > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel -

    no
    > > need for
    > > > > > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy

    > > installation'! With
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in

    mind,
    > > but no
    > > > > > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in

    > > *.ZIP's, but
    > > > > > this
    > > > > > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I

    have
    > > two
    > > > > > running
    > > > > > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust.

    Is it
    > > > > > practical
    > > > > > > > at
    > > > > > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve

    > > nothing but
    > > > > > > > backup
    > > > > > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of

    > > putting it
    > > > > > all
    > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > good use.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have

    a
    > > Suse
    > > > > > 10.0
    > > > > > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it

    up
    > > is
    > > > > > quite
    > > > > > > > > difficult.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >

    > >
    > >
    > >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 5, 2007
    #12
  13. Tony Sperling

    Guest

    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > Ah, yes - that's true, but in reallity, 0+1 should combine Stripe and Mirror
    > and so, only show a minor slowdown for the processing and writing involved
    > in the mirroring that is taking place. This will all happen concurrently,
    > and will need a minimum (I think of 4 drives) it will have a speed-boost
    > equal to a RAID0 of two discs minus something, if I'm not mistaken. And all,
    > with the added security as a bonus.


    Yes, I have 4 drives in the box. I used the Gigabyte ga-k8n ultra-9
    mobo, which can interface to 8 sata devices, 4 at a time. You could run
    raid-5 on one of the controllers, though I don't know if suse 10.2
    recognizes it. One controller is the NVraid, and the other is Silicon
    Image chip based.

    I like the mobo a lot, but am annoyed that it only recognized about
    3.2G of the 4G RAM that I populated the board. I thought the AMD 54
    has it's own memory controller, so I don't see what limits the mobo
    ram.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .
    >
    >
    > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > Tony:
    > > What I wanted to mean is that only RAID0 provides the performance boost we
    > > were both looking for.
    > > Carlos
    > >
    > > "Tony Sperling" wrote:
    > >
    > > > Not unlikely! The ROM chip is supported and that covers several more

    > layers
    > > > of RAID sets.
    > > >
    > > > Tony. . .
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > Are you sure it is RAID0+1?
    > > > > Tony and I are working with RAID0 (byte stripping).
    > > > > Carlos
    > > > >
    > > > > "" wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > Let's hear what you think!
    > > > > >
    > > > > > It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was

    > recognized.
    > > > > > I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64 bit
    > > > > > Suse, but you probably guessed that.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day -

    > stick
    > > > the
    > > > > > > CD/DVD
    > > > > > > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions. When

    > you
    > > > land
    > > > > > > in
    > > > > > > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two
    > > > existing
    > > > > > > Windows
    > > > > > > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux partitions
    > > > using up
    > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the

    > /Home
    > > > dir's
    > > > > > > size
    > > > > > > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > That's IT!
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and supported -
    > > > others
    > > > > > > may
    > > > > > > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of common

    > ROM
    > > > based
    > > > > > > > > RAID's.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing

    > pretty
    > > > much
    > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid' a

    > Red
    > > > Hat
    > > > > > > > > invention.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have 'Home',

    > 'x64'
    > > > AND
    > > > > > > 'Suse
    > > > > > > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man oh,
    > > > man, this
    > > > > > > is
    > > > > > > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache - has

    > 466MB
    > > > of
    > > > > > > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any kind

    > of
    > > > real
    > > > > > > live
    > > > > > > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing what

    > the
    > > > disk +
    > > > > > > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows Cache
    > > > enabled, I
    > > > > > > had
    > > > > > > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly close

    > to
    > > > the
    > > > > > > > > theoretical
    > > > > > > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own - but

    > it
    > > > does
    > > > > > > show
    > > > > > > > > what
    > > > > > > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True, booting is
    > > > fast, but
    > > > > > > > > after
    > > > > > > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it really

    > isn't
    > > > that
    > > > > > > big
    > > > > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is Installing.

    > This
    > > > used
    > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > be so
    > > > > > > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do it

    > once
    > > > more
    > > > > > > just
    > > > > > > > > for
    > > > > > > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the kernel -

    > no
    > > > need for
    > > > > > > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy
    > > > installation'! With
    > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in

    > mind,
    > > > but no
    > > > > > > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in
    > > > *.ZIP's, but
    > > > > > > this
    > > > > > > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I

    > have
    > > > two
    > > > > > > running
    > > > > > > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting dust.

    > Is it
    > > > > > > practical
    > > > > > > > > at
    > > > > > > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to recieve
    > > > nothing but
    > > > > > > > > backup
    > > > > > > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways of
    > > > putting it
    > > > > > > all
    > > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > > good use.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I have

    > a
    > > > Suse
    > > > > > > 10.0
    > > > > > > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting it

    > up
    > > > is
    > > > > > > quite
    > > > > > > > > > difficult.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > >
    > > >
    > > >
     
    , Jan 5, 2007
    #13
  14. I think you should check regularly for BIOS updates, as I remember, this is
    kind of a shortcut to sqeeze PCI intercommunication into the memory pool,
    something that could be achieved by other means within the BIOS itself, if
    they made the effort.


    Tony. . .


    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > Ah, yes - that's true, but in reallity, 0+1 should combine Stripe and

    Mirror
    > > and so, only show a minor slowdown for the processing and writing

    involved
    > > in the mirroring that is taking place. This will all happen

    concurrently,
    > > and will need a minimum (I think of 4 drives) it will have a speed-boost
    > > equal to a RAID0 of two discs minus something, if I'm not mistaken. And

    all,
    > > with the added security as a bonus.

    >
    > Yes, I have 4 drives in the box. I used the Gigabyte ga-k8n ultra-9
    > mobo, which can interface to 8 sata devices, 4 at a time. You could run
    > raid-5 on one of the controllers, though I don't know if suse 10.2
    > recognizes it. One controller is the NVraid, and the other is Silicon
    > Image chip based.
    >
    > I like the mobo a lot, but am annoyed that it only recognized about
    > 3.2G of the 4G RAM that I populated the board. I thought the AMD 54
    > has it's own memory controller, so I don't see what limits the mobo
    > ram.
    > >
    > >
    > > Tony. . .
    > >
    > >
    > > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > Tony:
    > > > What I wanted to mean is that only RAID0 provides the performance

    boost we
    > > > were both looking for.
    > > > Carlos
    > > >
    > > > "Tony Sperling" wrote:
    > > >
    > > > > Not unlikely! The ROM chip is supported and that covers several more

    > > layers
    > > > > of RAID sets.
    > > > >
    > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > > > > news:...
    > > > > > Are you sure it is RAID0+1?
    > > > > > Tony and I are working with RAID0 (byte stripping).
    > > > > > Carlos
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "" wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > Let's hear what you think!
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was

    > > recognized.
    > > > > > > I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64

    bit
    > > > > > > Suse, but you probably guessed that.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day -

    > > stick
    > > > > the
    > > > > > > > CD/DVD
    > > > > > > > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions.

    When
    > > you
    > > > > land
    > > > > > > > in
    > > > > > > > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two
    > > > > existing
    > > > > > > > Windows
    > > > > > > > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux

    partitions
    > > > > using up
    > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the

    > > /Home
    > > > > dir's
    > > > > > > > size
    > > > > > > > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > That's IT!
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and

    supported -
    > > > > others
    > > > > > > > may
    > > > > > > > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of

    common
    > > ROM
    > > > > based
    > > > > > > > > > RAID's.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing

    > > pretty
    > > > > much
    > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid'

    a
    > > Red
    > > > > Hat
    > > > > > > > > > invention.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > >

    news:...
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have

    'Home',
    > > 'x64'
    > > > > AND
    > > > > > > > 'Suse
    > > > > > > > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man

    oh,
    > > > > man, this
    > > > > > > > is
    > > > > > > > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache -

    has
    > > 466MB
    > > > > of
    > > > > > > > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any

    kind
    > > of
    > > > > real
    > > > > > > > live
    > > > > > > > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing

    what
    > > the
    > > > > disk +
    > > > > > > > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows

    Cache
    > > > > enabled, I
    > > > > > > > had
    > > > > > > > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly

    close
    > > to
    > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > theoretical
    > > > > > > > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own -

    but
    > > it
    > > > > does
    > > > > > > > show
    > > > > > > > > > what
    > > > > > > > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True,

    booting is
    > > > > fast, but
    > > > > > > > > > after
    > > > > > > > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it

    really
    > > isn't
    > > > > that
    > > > > > > > big
    > > > > > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is

    Installing.
    > > This
    > > > > used
    > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > be so
    > > > > > > > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do

    it
    > > once
    > > > > more
    > > > > > > > just
    > > > > > > > > > for
    > > > > > > > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the

    kernel -
    > > no
    > > > > need for
    > > > > > > > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy
    > > > > installation'! With
    > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in

    > > mind,
    > > > > but no
    > > > > > > > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in
    > > > > *.ZIP's, but
    > > > > > > > this
    > > > > > > > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I

    > > have
    > > > > two
    > > > > > > > running
    > > > > > > > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting

    dust.
    > > Is it
    > > > > > > > practical
    > > > > > > > > > at
    > > > > > > > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to

    recieve
    > > > > nothing but
    > > > > > > > > > backup
    > > > > > > > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways

    of
    > > > > putting it
    > > > > > > > all
    > > > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > > > good use.
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I

    have
    > > a
    > > > > Suse
    > > > > > > > 10.0
    > > > > > > > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting

    it
    > > up
    > > > > is
    > > > > > > > quite
    > > > > > > > > > > difficult.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >
    > > > >

    >
     
    Tony Sperling, Jan 5, 2007
    #14
  15. Tony Sperling

    Guest

    Tony Sperling wrote:
    > I think you should check regularly for BIOS updates, as I remember, this is
    > kind of a shortcut to sqeeze PCI intercommunication into the memory pool,
    > something that could be achieved by other means within the BIOS itself, if
    > they made the effort.
    >
    >
    > Tony. . .


    I had updated the x64 PC, but the linux machine had a job that had been
    running for a few days, and there was no way I was going to interrupt
    it. Then I just forgot.

    To keep this relevant to X64, it should be possible now to dual boot a
    PC wit windows and suse 10.2 under fake raid. I think I would make the
    partitions first using windows and the program of your choice
    (partition commander or whatever). I prefer to have two machines, as
    there are useful way to use them in tadem.


    BTW, photoshop 6 now mysterious works on my X64 machine. No changes on
    my part. I should probably spend the bucks and get a more current
    version, maybe 64 bit ready.

    >
    >
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > Ah, yes - that's true, but in reallity, 0+1 should combine Stripe and

    > Mirror
    > > > and so, only show a minor slowdown for the processing and writing

    > involved
    > > > in the mirroring that is taking place. This will all happen

    > concurrently,
    > > > and will need a minimum (I think of 4 drives) it will have a speed-boost
    > > > equal to a RAID0 of two discs minus something, if I'm not mistaken. And

    > all,
    > > > with the added security as a bonus.

    > >
    > > Yes, I have 4 drives in the box. I used the Gigabyte ga-k8n ultra-9
    > > mobo, which can interface to 8 sata devices, 4 at a time. You could run
    > > raid-5 on one of the controllers, though I don't know if suse 10.2
    > > recognizes it. One controller is the NVraid, and the other is Silicon
    > > Image chip based.
    > >
    > > I like the mobo a lot, but am annoyed that it only recognized about
    > > 3.2G of the 4G RAM that I populated the board. I thought the AMD 54
    > > has it's own memory controller, so I don't see what limits the mobo
    > > ram.
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > Tony. . .
    > > >
    > > >
    > > > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > > > news:...
    > > > > Tony:
    > > > > What I wanted to mean is that only RAID0 provides the performance

    > boost we
    > > > > were both looking for.
    > > > > Carlos
    > > > >
    > > > > "Tony Sperling" wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > > Not unlikely! The ROM chip is supported and that covers several more
    > > > layers
    > > > > > of RAID sets.
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > > "Carlos" <> wrote in message
    > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > > Are you sure it is RAID0+1?
    > > > > > > Tony and I are working with RAID0 (byte stripping).
    > > > > > > Carlos
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > "" wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > Let's hear what you think!
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > It installed fine after I flashed the mobo. My raid 0+1 was
    > > > recognized.
    > > > > > > > I'll let the PC run a while and see if it is stable. Oh, it's 64

    > bit
    > > > > > > > Suse, but you probably guessed that.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > news:...
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > > Quite honestly, I never thought I'd live to see the day -
    > > > stick
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > CD/DVD
    > > > > > > > > > > in the drive and boot, and go throught the usual motions.

    > When
    > > > you
    > > > > > land
    > > > > > > > > in
    > > > > > > > > > > the partition manager, there's a RAID showing up, with two
    > > > > > existing
    > > > > > > > > Windows
    > > > > > > > > > > partitions and it suggests a set of the usual Linux

    > partitions
    > > > > > using up
    > > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > > rest of the total space. With three drives, I adjusted the
    > > > /Home
    > > > > > dir's
    > > > > > > > > size
    > > > > > > > > > > a bit and pressed 'O.K.'
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > That's IT!
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > This is nVidia RAID and it is fully recognized and

    > supported -
    > > > > > others
    > > > > > > > > may
    > > > > > > > > > > not be, but the team claim support covering a set of

    > common
    > > > ROM
    > > > > > based
    > > > > > > > > > > RAID's.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > If you ask me - I believe Sabayon is thinking about doing
    > > > pretty
    > > > > > much
    > > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > > same thing in the near future - the support is in 'dmraid'

    > a
    > > > Red
    > > > > > Hat
    > > > > > > > > > > invention.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > I have nvidia raid as well and will give it a try.
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > <> wrote in message
    > > > > > > > > > >

    > news:...
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > Tony Sperling wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, indeed! RAID0 rocks!
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > In the end I had to dump Win2K. (Sob!) Now have

    > 'Home',
    > > > 'x64'
    > > > > > AND
    > > > > > > > > 'Suse
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Linux x64' on that RAID - 3 x SATA 300 Barracudas. Man

    > oh,
    > > > > > man, this
    > > > > > > > > is
    > > > > > > > > > > > > almost sca-a-a-ary!
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > One test that circumvents the Windows System Cache -

    > has
    > > > 466MB
    > > > > > of
    > > > > > > > > > > > > throughput. This is clearly not a fair test, or any

    > kind
    > > > of
    > > > > > real
    > > > > > > > > live
    > > > > > > > > > > > > performance you'll ever see, but a figure describing

    > what
    > > > the
    > > > > > disk +
    > > > > > > > > > > > > subsystem can handle on it's own. With the Windows

    > Cache
    > > > > > enabled, I
    > > > > > > > > had
    > > > > > > > > > > > > around 266MB sustained access which is comfortingly

    > close
    > > > to
    > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > > theoretical
    > > > > > > > > > > > > 300. Bottleneck gone!
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > I know, this doesn't have to mean a lot on it's own -

    > but
    > > > it
    > > > > > does
    > > > > > > > > show
    > > > > > > > > > > what
    > > > > > > > > > > > > kind of head-room is in there, I believe. True,

    > booting is
    > > > > > fast, but
    > > > > > > > > > > after
    > > > > > > > > > > > > having all the drivers and antivirus installed it

    > really
    > > > isn't
    > > > > > that
    > > > > > > > > big
    > > > > > > > > > > a
    > > > > > > > > > > > > difference - what really sets this appart, is

    > Installing.
    > > > This
    > > > > > used
    > > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > > be so
    > > > > > > > > > > > > tedious - now, if you're bored, you might actually do

    > it
    > > > once
    > > > > > more
    > > > > > > > > just
    > > > > > > > > > > for
    > > > > > > > > > > > > the hell of it!
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Suse 10.2 RC1 has ROM based RAID support in the

    > kernel -
    > > > no
    > > > > > need for
    > > > > > > > > > > > > external drivers, a school book example of 'easy
    > > > > > installation'! With
    > > > > > > > > the
    > > > > > > > > > > > > MS/Novell agreement, we all may end up benefitting?
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, I need to think about backup - I had DAT Tape in
    > > > mind,
    > > > > > but no
    > > > > > > > > > > > > experience, I used to just archive my personal data in
    > > > > > *.ZIP's, but
    > > > > > > > > this
    > > > > > > > > > > > > setup will require a more targeted approach, I fear. I
    > > > have
    > > > > > two
    > > > > > > > > running
    > > > > > > > > > > > > machines at the moment and one good one collecting

    > dust.
    > > > Is it
    > > > > > > > > practical
    > > > > > > > > > > at
    > > > > > > > > > > > > all to envision a box full of HD's and no OS, to

    > recieve
    > > > > > nothing but
    > > > > > > > > > > backup
    > > > > > > > > > > > > data? The reverse of a file-server?
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Hardware is piling up here, I'm trying to figure ways

    > of
    > > > > > putting it
    > > > > > > > > all
    > > > > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > > > > good use.
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > (This was an extremely rewarding day!)
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > > Tony. . .
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > > Does the kernal "sit" on the raid, or just the data. I

    > have
    > > > a
    > > > > > Suse
    > > > > > > > > 10.0
    > > > > > > > > > > > system that does have raid (actually fraid), but setting

    > it
    > > > up
    > > > > > is
    > > > > > > > > quite
    > > > > > > > > > > > difficult.
    > > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >
    > > > > >

    > >
     
    , Jan 6, 2007
    #15
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. MW

    FOR SALE:Bob Carlos Clarke-Riviere Citron

    MW, May 19, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    403
  2. =?Utf-8?B?Q2FybG9zLUNoQGJvdA==?=

    Carlos-Ch@bot

    =?Utf-8?B?Q2FybG9zLUNoQGJvdA==?=, Dec 29, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    470
    Bruce Chambers
    Dec 30, 2005
  3. Andre Da Costa [Extended64]

    Where is Colin, Carlos and others?

    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], Mar 28, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    416
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64]
    Apr 3, 2006
  4. Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin]

    IE 7 in Spanish for Carlos :)

    Andre Da Costa[ActiveWin], Nov 3, 2006, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    430
    Jud Hendrix
    Nov 4, 2006
  5. Carlos

    Carlos moving to Carlos Atashian

    Carlos, Jul 1, 2010, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    523
    Vjekoslav
    Jul 2, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page