On 07/12/13 03:10, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
Stan - I assume you mean the Adaptec 6405E:
It's the best little SOHO RAID card for the money IMO, and the most
flexible WRT PCIe slots,
Okay.
eats a $50 port that can be part of a RAID set. You can attach that SSD
to a free mobo SATA port and use cl
On 7/11/2013 11:23 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> On 07/10/13 23:12, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>
> On 07/11/13 09:25, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
>
> Thank you both for your insights. :-)
>
>
> Stan - I assume you mean the Adaptec 6405E:
>
> https://www.adaptec.com/en-us/products/series/
On 7/11/2013 10:03 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>> 1. If you're buying enterprise RAID arrays, you should have matching disks
>>> and firmware, and they must be in the vendor approved list. Best to get
>>> them all from the same vendor.
>>
>>
On 07/10/13 23:12, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
On 07/11/13 09:25, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Thank you both for your insights. :-)
Stan - I assume you mean the Adaptec 6405E:
https://www.adaptec.com/en-us/products/series/6e/
That looks like a nice card, and Adaptec is a name I respect.
On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > 1. If you're buying enterprise RAID arrays, you should have matching disks
> > and firmware, and they must be in the vendor approved list. Best to get
> > them all from the same vendor.
>
> This is also true of quality PCIe RAID HBAs. LSI and Adaptec
On 7/11/2013 8:17 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Anyway, I will make a summary that actually separates the apples from the
> oranges, because we were clearly talking about different things:
No, we are talking about the exact same things.
> 1. If you're buying enterprise RAID arrays, yo
On 7/11/2013 4:44 PM, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
...
> So please, do [NOT] tell people that they should use drives from different
> vendors with mismatched firmware on a real RAID controller
...
Correction inserted in brackets above. The statement should be in the
negative, not the affirmative.
--
St
On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 7/11/2013 11:25 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> >>> At some point in the future, I may buy one or two additional HDD and use
> >>> hardware RAID.
> >>
> >> It's best to use identical drives with id
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 7/11/2013 3:43 AM, Chris Davies wrote:
>> Can you help clarify, please?
> Se my detailed response to Henrique.
Thank you
Chris
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.o
On 7/11/2013 3:43 AM, Chris Davies wrote:
> Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> It's best to use identical drives with identical firmware, which means
>> buying all your drives up front from the same lot.
>
> I had always understood that best practice was the opposite of this
> recommendation, so as to help
On 7/11/2013 11:25 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>>> At some point in the future, I may buy one or two additional HDD and use
>>> hardware RAID.
>>
>> It's best to use identical drives with identical firmware, which means
>> buying all your drive
On Thu, 11 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> > At some point in the future, I may buy one or two additional HDD and use
> > hardware RAID.
>
> It's best to use identical drives with identical firmware, which means
> buying all your drives up front from the same lot. You also need to
That is a fas
Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> It's best to use identical drives with identical firmware, which means
> buying all your drives up front from the same lot.
I had always understood that best practice was the opposite of this
recommendation, so as to help protect against a single point of failure
such as ba
On 7/10/2013 11:03 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> On 07/10/13 17:04, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> LSI HBAs are acknowledged as the most Linux compatible/friendly and
>> highest performance HBAs/RAID cards available. The 9211-4i is the least
>> expensive HBA in their lineup, a PCIe 2.0 x4 card w/4 ports
On 07/10/13 17:04, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
LSI HBAs are acknowledged as the most Linux compatible/friendly and
highest performance HBAs/RAID cards available. The 9211-4i is the least
expensive HBA in their lineup, a PCIe 2.0 x4 card w/4 ports.
Thanks for the reply. I see you still favor LSI prod
On 7/9/2013 9:45 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> On 07/09/13 07:21, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
>> x1, x4, or x8 slot width?
>
> x1 or x4.
>
>> Price range?
>
> Under $50 per SATA3 port, including cables, whatever.
>
>> Expected performance level?
>
> Comparable to current/ recent Intel desktop chipse
On 07/09/13 07:34, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
Also, keep clear of anything that has straps (jumper blocks) to select
internal/external ports (*even if said jumper blocks are not installed in
the printed circuit board*). They cause violations of SATA3 phy (electrical
signaling) parameters
On 07/09/13 07:21, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
x1, x4, or x8 slot width?
x1 or x4.
Price range?
Under $50 per SATA3 port, including cables, whatever.
Expected performance level?
Comparable to current/ recent Intel desktop chipsets/ motherboards.
Workstation or dedicated server?
Workstat
On Tue, 09 Jul 2013, Stan Hoeppner wrote:
> On 7/7/2013 12:55 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> > Can anyone recommend a PCI Express 2.0 SATA 3 host bus adapter with good
> > FOSS licensing/ documentation/ support? I'm looking for at least two
> > SATA 3 ports; four port
On 7/7/2013 12:55 PM, David Christensen wrote:
> Can anyone recommend a PCI Express 2.0 SATA 3 host bus adapter with good
> FOSS licensing/ documentation/ support? I'm looking for at least two
> SATA 3 ports; four ports would be ideal. I don't need RAID.
x1, x4, or x8 slot
debian-user:
Can anyone recommend a PCI Express 2.0 SATA 3 host bus adapter with good
FOSS licensing/ documentation/ support? I'm looking for at least two
SATA 3 ports; four ports would be ideal. I don't need RAID.
TIA,
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian
On Thursday, October 21, 2010 06:29:35 pm Camaleón wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 07:56:19 +1000, GeraldCC wrote:
>
> (...)
>
> > It does seem to me, at least, the kernel does not really support Sata 3
> > out of the boxes. This is a new box, and I have just upgraded it
On Thu, 21 Oct 2010 07:56:19 +1000, GeraldCC wrote:
(...)
> It does seem to me, at least, the kernel does not really support Sata 3
> out of the boxes. This is a new box, and I have just upgraded it to all
> Sata 3 drives. When it only had 1 Sata 3 drive and 2 Sata 2 drives it
> ran
GeraldCC wrote:
Debian (All flavours) just does not run properly. By that I mean the system
just behaves oddly. Some things do not work and rebooting also gives "X"
problems.
Something here to suggest latest kernels needed ...
http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2010/6/15/4583184
Hi to all,
Sata 3 seems to have problems with all versions of Linux that I have thrown at
them.
PClinuxOS 2010.07 on right click with mouse make the system non-responsive,no
keyboard or mouse clicks, and basically no real screen display-only a white
screen and no "X" on rebooting.
D
On Wed, 20 Oct 2010 18:21:47 +1000, GeraldCC wrote:
> Has anyone had any problems running Debian or indeed any other OS in
> raid 1 on Sata 3 drives.
> It does appear to me that Sata 3 is not really supported in the latest
> kernels, if that is where support actually lies. Geral
Hi to all,
Has anyone had any problems running Debian or indeed any other OS in raid 1 on
Sata 3 drives.
It does appear to me that Sata 3 is not really supported in the latest
kernels, if that is where support actually lies.
Gerald
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ
27 matches
Mail list logo
