On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 20:12 -0500, Roger Heflin wrote: > > If it is an out-of-kernel driver, then the work is being done in the > manufacturer's driver. I see. > If it is dmraid it is being done in the dmraid driver. Ahhh. So in the above "out of kernel driver" instance that is a case where dmraid is not handling it, yes? > If there is no underlying hardware to run the raid on then everything has > to be done in the OS. Indeed. I had just wondered if these "fakeraid" solutions where at least fanning out the copy (in the case of mirror) themselves, saving the doubling of PCI bus traffic. > All of the real raid cards have at least a > really basic microprocesser on the card that takes care of things. Yeah, I'm fairly familiar with the concepts of real RAID hardware. It was this new fakeraid I was wondering about. Thanx for the enlightenment though. The one last value that I had hope for in the fakeraid arena seems to be invalid so I have to start to agree with the documentation I've read and really have to wonder the value of the fakeraid, especially and until the on-disk formats are standardized. Not being able to move fakeraid disks from one manufacturer to another is a real impediment in my mind. b.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
