From: Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc@linuxweasel.com>
To: "'linux-raid@vger.kernel.org'" <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: some IDE trays are bad (was Re: SW-RAID 1 and kernel 2.4.18)
Date: 03 Dec 2002 14:10:16 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1038953416.1917.19.camel@peecee.linuxweasel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021203160141.GA7990@apartia.org>
On Tue, 2002-12-03 at 08:01, Louis-David Mitterrand wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2002 at 02:56:41PM +0100, SCHEP. - Schepke, Arnt wrote:
> > The system seems to work correctly. But i get some errors. In the file
> > messages i found:
> >
> > linux kernel: hdc: dma_intr: status=0x51 { DriveReady SeekComplete Error }
> > linux kernel: hdc: dma_intr: error=0x84 { DriveStatusError BadCRC }
>
> I've just had the same problem. My setup: 4 Maxtor 160G connected to a
> Promise 133TX2 card, one of them was in an Icy Dock removable rack, the
> three remaining were directly connected to the IDE cable.
>
> The tray-connected disk would always give us the BadCRC error upon
> resynching with the raid5 array. That kind of error is typical of bad
> cabling.
>
> It seems the additionnal connectors and cable-length in these IDE trays
> is too much to bear for picky/sensitive ATA133 drives. In any case the
> BadCRC disappeared the moment the drive was directly connected the IDE
> ribbon.
It's probably far more the quality of the connectors and such than the
length of the cables.
> hdparm -t /dev/md1 gives me over 100MB/s on IDE raid5. Incredible! Over
> twice what a top-of-the-line 15k scsi drive gives me.
Are you saying that a RAID 5 array gives you better performance than a
single disk? Make sense to me. I'd be far more interested in a real
benchmark, rather than hdparm. Across given runs on a single disk, I've
found it to be reasonably reliable, but from one disk to another, not
necessarily.
Greg
--
Gregory Leblanc <gleblanc@linuxweasel.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-03 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-26 13:56 SW-RAID 1 and kernel 2.4.18 SCHEP. - Schepke, Arnt
2002-11-26 19:33 ` Steven Dake
2002-11-26 22:52 ` H. Peter Anvin
2002-11-26 23:05 ` Alvin Oga
2002-12-03 16:01 ` some IDE trays are bad (was Re: SW-RAID 1 and kernel 2.4.18) Louis-David Mitterrand
2002-12-03 21:06 ` Maurice Hilarius
2002-12-03 22:10 ` Gregory Leblanc [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-12-03 22:50 Maurice Hilarius
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1038953416.1917.19.camel@peecee.linuxweasel.com \
--to=gleblanc@linuxweasel.com \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.