🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.os.netware.misc
Article #386

Re: RAID 5 vs duplexing

#386
From: Roger Kresge
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 1996 00:00
43 lines
2652 bytes
kcordes@mo.net (Kyle Cordes) wrote:

>In article <4olb39$9i1@lily.redrose.net>, rkresge@web.iis-centpa.com wrote:

>>Hmmmmmm....  I've seen a few otherwise knowledgeable system engineers
>>(even a CNE who *should* have known better) install a new drive and
>>mirror the good drive to the empty new one.  Kind of hard on the data,
>>doing that.  Suppose that's what might have caused the good drive to
>>get "corrupted"?

>Just in case I ever have a mirrored drive fail...

>What IS the proper procedure for restoring operations?

The proper way is to make sure you know which drive is which before
you start mirroring.  The long numbers you see in INSTALL actually
tell you which drive is which; you can also blink the drive activity
light on *some* drives (this requires controller support) manually, in
order to identify which drive is which.

One easy way to handle this is to carefully note which drive has
NetWare partitions and which doesn't, before you add the necessary
partition.  Then you'll have the NetWare ID of the new drive before
starting the mirror process.

>And why isn't Netware smart enough to realize that if you have a drive full of
>data that used to be mirrored, and got unmirrored due to drive failure, and
>now has an empty drive mirrored to it, you probably intend to replace the
>failed drive with the one you just plugged in.

It's a little hard to do that, since mirroring is done at the
partition level.  Data doesn't happen until after you've created
volumes on the partitions.  Nothing beats a little experience and
knowledge (read that as a combination of advance preparation, study,
and hands-on experience).

--
===================================================================
Roger Kresge, Master CNE/CNI   Internet: rkresge@web.iis-centpa.com
Inacom Information Systems                    Compuserve: 71023,447
Lancaster, PA     
===================================================================
Technical Details
Message-ID: <4or2uj$aa@lily.redrose.net>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <31938d64.16703900@news.execpc.com> <4o22hp$5pr@clarknet.clark.net> <31A95E52.4063@dpie.gov.au> <4of367$rfp@clarknet.cla <4oms6f$21m@Twain.MO.NET>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: fe659,6b2e5f577816a3a4
X-Google-Attributes: gidfe659,public
X-Google-Thread: f8bf7,6b2e5f577816a3a4
X-Google-Attributes: gidf8bf7,public
From: rkresge@web.iis-centpa.com (Roger Kresge)
Subject: Re: RAID 5 vs duplexing
Date: 1996/06/02
Message-ID: <4or2uj$aa@lily.redrose.net>
X-Deja-AN: 158000274
references: <31938d64.16703900@news.execpc.com> <4o22hp$5pr@clarknet.clark.net> <31A95E52.4063@dpie.gov.au> <4of367$rfp@clarknet.cla <4oms6f$21m@Twain.MO.NET>
organization: a Digital Internet AlphaServer Site
reply-to: rkresge@web.iis-centpa.com
newsgroups: comp.os.netware.misc,bit.listserv.novell