Re: sata_nv and RAID1

[Michael Tokarev <mjt@tls.msk.ru>]

Molle Bestefich wrote:
> Michael Tokarev wrote:
> 
>>Without proper error handling [...]
>>linux SATA subsystem isn't ready for production,
>>and people should not rely on it *now*.

Note there was an "if" in that [...] -- "IF I/O errors are
*really* not handled properly, linux SATA subsystem isn't
ready etc"

> As long as disks aren't removed, it's OK for production..
> 
> But I'll agree with anyone who says that IDE under Linux just sucks
> donkey ass compared to IDE under Windows.  With Windows 2K and later,
> unplugging both SATA and PATA devices Just Works (tm).  I'm having a
> hard time figuring how this works: there's enough people supporting
> Linux to build a complete web-enabled SCM system (git) in a couple of
> weeks, but noone has bothered to fix this glaring flaw for the past 5
> years?  What gives?

Well.. I don't want to start a flamewar, but I tend to disagree.
I for one don't care (for now) about SATA and hot[un]plug for
harddrives.  But ol'good IDE works under linux just fine, together
with proper (fsvo "proper", which isn't still proper for alot of
IDE drives, but that's hardware and linux can't do anything there)
error handling and stuff.  And with out-of-the-box toolset
(smartmontools, hdparm), the support is better than win* --
I have more options to monitor my drives, to reallocate bad
blocks, to watch for drives dying, to control several h/w
aspects of devices than on win*.  Well, ok, (and oh, it's
another hot flamewar topic), I'm trying to avoid usage of
IDE drives due to various limitations and defeciencies, and
tend to use SCSI devices if at all possible...  And ok, ok,
IDE != SATA... ;)

/mjt