Recent content by bobdazzla

Thank you for the input spam, I think you are right, and that a controller failure is very unlikely. Even if it did happen and DID lead to corruption that would cause the array to fail, I can't imagine that it would cause a super-catastrophic corruption of the filesystem or anything, so if I...

I think what I'm really asking is whether or not a failed controller leads to corruption on the drives that were attached to it. If it doesn't, cool, I can run 2 cards on a controller and if it fails, just swap it out. But if a failed controller DOES cause corruption on all drives attached...

Dearest Raid Gentlemen: Putting together my first raid system, will be doing it through software in linux. I have a handful of promise ide controllers that have 2 IDE channels per card. I know that running two drives on a cable (in a master/slave config) is a definate no go, because if 1...

Thank you all for the advice. I think I'm going to go with the 3 arrays option I described in the 2nd post, and then add them all into 1 LVM like nweaver suggested (I'm very glad you pointed that out, I wasn't aware linux could do that). I'll drop in little 40 GB drive into the system to...

hi rebate, I would be doing this RAID5 via software through linux. Does this make the either of the setups I described in the 2nd post of this thread possible?

TGS, thanks for the detailed advice. I was wondering if I could get a little more clarification: so what you are saying is, if I take the 5 drives (again, 3x200GB and 2x300GB) and make 10x100 GB partitions from them, I can't add them all into 1 raid array (and even if that WAS possible, I'd...

Computer Mens: Going to be setting up a software RAID5 system via linux. I have a number of different drives here with different capacities (3x200GB, 2x300GB), so I was wondering; is it possible to partition each of those drives into 100GB each, so that I won't have to reduce the 300GB drives...