Johann Uhrmann wrote: > On Sat, 2003-01-25 at 09:02, Murty Rompalli wrote: > > Yes, ataraid and promise proprietary raid both do not support that > > failsafe feature. Hopefully RedHat people will someday integrate such > > features of md raid into ataraid. > > Thanks for that information. I am a little bit confused about > mirroring-ataraid. To make a long story short: > > Why on earth should people use it, if not for that failsafe feature > which is obviously missing? Great question. I also see no point in using ataraid on computers running exclusively Linux. MD raid works really great. On the other hand, ataraid could be helpful in multi-OS enviroment. As I wrote, I had to use WinXP Pro, and prefer ataraid to native Windows mirroring. > According to the information I have got so far, ataraid behaves like > this: [...] > - If one disk fails, the whole system crashes. Not exactly (if you use RAID1). Lilo can load your kernel, but during ataraid detection you get oopses. Recovering procedure requires booting kernel _without_ ataraid, and changing your fstab to mount proper /dev/hd[efgh]X partition as your root filesystem. Your files shouldn't be harmed (at least mine weren't). > > - In that case, the user has to guess which disk failed and copy > it to a spare and restart the machine while praying loud in front of a > wailing wall to the lord of data consistency. :)) That "little enhanced bios" informs you, which drive is broken. > Could someone disprove those statements, please? Everything I wrote is based on my personal experience with GA-7ZXR motherboard and Promise FastTrack 100 Lite controller. I set up a raid 1 and had to detach one drive for a several days. Marcin
