Brett Serkez spake the following on 4/2/2007 2:06 PM:
>> > No, it is an older PIII with two IDE hard drives plugged into the
>> > motherboard. To the best of my knowledge, this is not the case.
>>>
>> It was common for some boards in that era to still have a promise ide
>> chip
>> embedded in them.
>
> I rebooted so I could check the BIOS and checked the boot messages
> with dmesg. I see no evidence of an sort of RAID controller. Here
> are the relevant dmesg messages:
>
> ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx
> ICH: IDE controller at PCI slot 0000:00:1f.1
> ICH: chipset revision 2
> ICH: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later
> ide0: BM-DMA at 0xffa0-0xffa7, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:pio
> ide1: BM-DMA at 0xffa8-0xffaf, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:DMA
> Probing IDE interface ide0...
> hda: Maxtor 36147H8, ATA DISK drive
> ide0 at 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6 on irq 14
> Probing IDE interface ide1...
> hdc: CRD-8400B, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive
> hdd: Maxtor 4D060H3, ATA DISK drive
> hdc: Disabling (U)DMA for CRD-8400B (blacklisted)
> ide1 at 0x170-0x177,0x376 on irq 15
> hda: max request size: 128KiB
> hda: 117231408 sectors (60022 MB) w/512KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63, UDMA(66)
> hda: cache flushes not supported
> hda: hda1 hda2
> hdd: max request size: 128KiB
> hdd: 120069936 sectors (61475 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63,
> UDMA(66)
> hdd: cache flushes not supported
> hdd: hdd1 hdd2
>
> Brett
You might get better performance if the second drive is a master instead of a
slave.
Looking at the dmraid man page, is it possible that the drives were in place
on a raid system previously?
It might be seeing the metadata and thinking it is a raid array.
http://www.linuxmanpages.com/man8/dmraid.8.php
--
MailScanner is like deodorant...
You hope everybody uses it, and
you notice quickly if they don't!!!!
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
