On Thu, 6 Jan 2005 21:16:43 +0100, Pieter Hulshoff
On Thursday 06 January 2005 20:54, Greg Freemyer wrote:
That's exactly what I've got in my system: md0 = /dev/hdb1 + /dev/hdd1 md1 = /dev/hda4 + /dev/hdc4 non-RAID partitions are on /dev/hda1, /dev/hda3, /dev/hdc1, and /dev/hdc3; /dev/hda2 and /dev/hdc2 are swap.
For some reason, I had assumed you were using a PCI based ATA controller. From the above, it looks like you are using a motherboard based controller.
That is correct: I'm using the motherboard's controllers in combination with Linux software RAID. Considering that I can use 8 IDE devices with my motherboard, perhaps I should consider creating the RAID arrays like: /dev/hda + /dev/hde /dev/hdb + /dev/hdf That way the two drives will be in separate controllers as well. I just noticed that copying data from /dev/hda to /dev/hde for instance is 3-5 times as fast as copying data from /dev/hda to /dev/hdc.
Regards,
Pieter Hulshoff
Nice motherboard that can control 8 disks. Unless you really need to I would avoid using slaves for any of your hard drives, then put cd/dvd, etc. on the slaves. And yes I think if you make your raid0 sets on hda/hde and hdc/hdg you will see a big speed improvement, but using hda will still interfere with hdc and hde with hdg. The PCI based controllers have more independent IDE controllers, so using hda impacts hdc less than the motherboard chipsets I have tested. Greg -- Greg Freemyer