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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).