Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750995AbXBXRTi (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:19:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752281AbXBXRTi (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:19:38 -0500 Received: from wr-out-0506.google.com ([64.233.184.229]:22853 "EHLO wr-out-0506.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750966AbXBXRTh (ORCPT ); Sat, 24 Feb 2007 12:19:37 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=Pnyv/RocBqqwHn63RbMIIMYq8kFS7ZVO9nZlsAAxfIZ7LWfCTscy4iniXCKcxYsoZCuvNZu58AuZDsrv/DVGlgXokZoZN47MHsEioPYdmAKqD9S39iZH0JP9RM5AhiATvHVRCT5pacwJZwWB06rM5LCmDoWiHZkJ3KrCpoyCXDo= Message-ID: <8d158e1f0702240919v33182ca2qc0a15fdd27a3f96a@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:19:31 +0000 From: "Patrick Ale" To: "Michael-Luke Jones" Subject: Re: [QUESTION] Sata RAID Cc: linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <6C96CE3D-85F5-479D-BD44-F5DA0AE744FF@fastmail.to> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <8d158e1f0702240210x71f981a6xf2fe8917dac5e91a@mail.gmail.com> <200702241624.17024.bzolnier@gmail.com> <6C96CE3D-85F5-479D-BD44-F5DA0AE744FF@fastmail.to> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1135 Lines: 31 On 2/24/07, Michael-Luke Jones wrote: > But using 'fakeraid' (i.e. BIOS RAID) together with dmraid is > generally discouraged in favour of using the more stable and well > supported Linux Software RAID functionality. > > Michael-Luke I think I actually used dmraid, and the problem I had in those days was that it was just a layer over your legacy IDE drivers. With 2.4 you had "real" drivers whom created block devices if I recall correctly which you could really treat as disks. If dmraid still works as it did in the days I used it it's just a layer, like LVM, and the kernel itself doesnt care at all for the disks being in a RAID set or not and will access the disks independently, this I really found a reason to not use dmraid and stick with MD devices. And by the reactions from you guys I guess those reasons still exist :) So MD it is, Thanks! Patrick - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/