|Date Added:||1 January 2011|
|File Size:||32.61 Mb|
|Operating Systems:||Windows NT/2000/XP/2003/2003/7/8/10 MacOS 10/X|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Jeremy 2 6 I’ve never had a problem procuring a rai RAID card in the event of a failure from HP, Dell, or IBM, so the only real value if you’re doing this strictly for compatibility is so that you can yank disks from one server and saa/sas them in another, which I’ve never seen anyone do ever.
Likewise, you can no longer take a RAID 0 array and make it fault tolerant – you got to back it up, wipe everything, build the array and then restore. Jeremy M 4 Share this post Link to post.
You can replace the controller with an identical softwae and it will see the old raid configuration and take off where the failed controller left off. Guest Enthusiast 14 Members 6, posts.
Troubles of migration or crash recovery are much higher than performance gained.
Apologies for the inconvenience. Software RAID is horrible for a number of reasons and people rad think that they are somehow more reliable than hardware, simply do not know how enough about hardware controllers. Or you could just decide that on controller failure you’d fall back to the most recent backup.
[Linux-PowerEdge] CentOS on Intel C600 with 3TB drives (GPT corruption)
There was nothing wrong with them, they were just obsolete. Posted March 1, It would depend on how the specific controller implemented the array. You could test for that by setting up the initial array and then pulling one of the drives and connecting it to a regular disk controller.
For whatever reason, different controllers do RAIDs differently. I had a CMD raid controller fail, and after a bit of easy sniffing around on the drives, I found that each drive had the RAID set configuration stored in the first few blocks.
If the array can be moved between systems “use disk config or use controller config” type prompt or can accept non-identical drives in the array, there is likely some abstraction happening. I work in a large laboratory with hundreds and hundreds of Linux boxes of all sizes.
Also, although the one controller is a single point of failure, controllers rarely fail. Bottom line, if your hardware RAID controller fails highly unlikely – you can take either of the drives, connect it to any machine and your data will be there.
Creating a RAID 5 in Intel® Embedded Server RAID Technology 2 with
I’ve been wanting to do a raid 1 setup in my home with a pair of sata drives. That can be done on both HP and Dell controllers without issue and I’m sure on plenty of other controllers as well. It will normally also work on different models within the same range, and often across generations from the same manufacturer.
Skipping that, and writing a simple program to read from each drive in the correct order including RAID 5’s rotated parity I managed to recover all the data. Posted September 21, This question appears to be off-topic. You can actually take either of the drives that were part of a RAID 1, connect them to a computer via any controller and the data will be there.
Please see the Help Center for more information on topicality.
Even if it can be done without issue, you still have to know what you’re doing. A lot of your rant is somewhat controller specific – especially the one about transforming single disks into RAID 1.
However, almost always the new controller will recognize the RAID and mount it in some sort of limited mode. There are no moving parts and as long as they are kept cool and have clean power, they almost always outlast their usefulness.
Typically yes the config is per controller type.