Sorry if this has been asked previously. Does CentOS support IDE hardware RAID on HP DL320? Thanks, -j
Joseph T Mai wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked previously. Does CentOS support IDE hardware RAID on HP DL320? Thanks, -j
What is the card, chipset?
Joseph T Mai wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked previously. Does CentOS support IDE hardware RAID on HP DL320? Thanks, -j
I've got several of these beasts (DL320 G2) and I haven't been able to get hardware RAID to work. The output of 'lspci' reports:
00:02.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 0649 Ultra ATA/100 PCI to ATA Host Controller (rev 02)
I believe this chipset is dependent on a Windows-based driver to make it work and is NOT supported in CentOS. I'm using software RAID 1 on them and am fairly happy with it.
Hope that helps!
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 14:36 -0500, Jay Leafey wrote:
Joseph T Mai wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked previously. Does CentOS support IDE hardware RAID on HP DL320? Thanks, -j
I've got several of these beasts (DL320 G2) and I haven't been able to get hardware RAID to work. The output of 'lspci' reports:
00:02.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 0649 Ultra ATA/100 PCI to ATA Host Controller (rev 02)
I believe this chipset is dependent on a Windows-based driver to make it work and is NOT supported in CentOS. I'm using software RAID 1 on them and am fairly happy with it.
The standard answer for "fake raid" cards from "Linux SATA RAID FAQ" http://linux.yyz.us/sata/faq-sata-raid.html
3. I have a Silicon Image SATA RAID card. Why doesn't Linux support my hardware RAID?
A. It's not hardware RAID. It is software RAID, provided by the BIOS on the card.
Phil
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 14:36 -0500, Jay Leafey wrote:
Joseph T Mai wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked previously. Does CentOS support IDE hardware RAID on HP DL320? Thanks, -j
I've got several of these beasts (DL320 G2) and I haven't been able to
get
hardware RAID to work. The output of 'lspci' reports:
00:02.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 0649 Ultra ATA/100 PCI to ATA Host Controller (rev 02)
I believe this chipset is dependent on a Windows-based driver to make it work and is NOT supported in CentOS. I'm using software RAID 1 on them and am fairly happy with it.
The standard answer for "fake raid" cards from "Linux SATA RAID FAQ" http://linux.yyz.us/sata/faq-sata-raid.html
3. I have a Silicon Image SATA RAID card. Why doesn't Linux support my hardware RAID? A. It's not hardware RAID. It is software RAID, provided by the BIOS on the card.
Indeed. I freaked out when I couldn't get my sata promise raid controlling working in Acer Altos series servers... Till I read an article that said in 2.4 its actually just as quick (if not quicker, depending on server hardware) to let the kernel deal with the raid stuff.
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/custom-guide/s1-raid-a pproaches.html
But what about the not being able to reliably put /boot on a raid partition ? I haven't tried this since 4.0, doe it work properly now ?
Indeed. I freaked out when I couldn't get my sata promise raid controlling working in Acer Altos series servers... Till I read an article that said in 2.4 its actually just as quick (if not quicker, depending on server hardware) to let the kernel deal with the raid stuff.
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/custom-guide/s1-raid-a pproaches.html
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
But what about the not being able to reliably put /boot on a raid partition ? I haven't tried this since 4.0, doe it work properly now ?
To be honest i didn't have time to test it (famous last words), but yes, i've previously had problems. Apperently using PALO you can get it to work nicely though:
http://www.parisc-linux.org/faq/raidboot-howto.html
Indeed. I freaked out when I couldn't get my sata promise raid controlling working in Acer Altos series servers... Till I read an article that said in 2.4 its actually just as quick (if not quicker, depending on server hardware) to let the kernel deal with the raid stuff.
http://www.redhat.com/docs/manuals/linux/RHL-9-Manual/custom-guide/s1-raid-a pproaches.html
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Tony Wicks wrote:
But what about the not being able to reliably put /boot on a raid partition ? I haven't tried this since 4.0, doe it work properly now ?
You can have /boot on software RAID-1 reliably. I've been using that kind of setup since Red Hat 7.x days, never had a single problem with it.
The only thing you should be aware of is that if you are using Grub as boot loader, there's bug in Anaconda (the installer) that it will install Grub only on the first disk. This is trivial to correct once installation is done. It was discussed many times on this list, as well as Red Hat's Fedora and Nahant lists. This is not an reliability problem. It is simply an annoyance.
If you use LILO as boot loader, everything simply works out-of-the-box, Anaconda will correctly install it on both drives.
Nick Bryant wrote:
Indeed. I freaked out when I couldn't get my sata promise raid controlling working in Acer Altos series servers... Till I read an article that said in 2.4 its actually just as quick (if not quicker, depending on server hardware) to let the kernel deal with the raid stuff.
Exactly. The rule of the thumb is, if you setup RAID in BIOS, and when you boot Linux still sees individual drives, you don't have real RAID controller.
That fake RAID stuff has only one purpuse. To allow users of Windows XP Home/Professional to have software RAID. If Microsoft shipped software RAID drivers with Home/Professional (like they do with Server), those fake RAID controllers would never exist. Or to be more correct, the controllers would exist (since they are basically just regular SATA controllers), but you wouldn't see word RAID mentioned anywhere on them, and there would be no RAID settings in their BIOS.
Aleksandar Milivojevic alex@milivojevic.org wrote:
Exactly. The rule of the thumb is, if you setup RAID in BIOS, and when you boot Linux still sees individual drives, you don't have real RAID controller.
That's because when the BIOS is running, the CPU is in Real86 (8086/8088) mode and can use the 16-bit RAID code.
If you boot DOS-based Windows (Windows 95/98/ME), its 386Enhanced (and yes, this is how Windows 95/98/ME still run!) mode constantly switches between Real86 and Protected386. It will use the Real86 mode to access the RAID in "compatibility" mode until you load the 100% _software_ FRAID driver (all the 32-bit RAID code is in the software driver, *0* on-board intelligence).
In NT-based Windows (including 2000/XP/2003), it is like Linux and uses Protected386 mode at all times. Thus is requires the 100% _software_ FRAID driver. If the NT version has support for the ATA chipset the FRAID card is based on, just like Linux, you will only see the "raw" drives. You need the FRAID driver to fool it, because your CPU is still driving all the disk access.
"Real hardware" RAID cards don't use software, they use an on-board intelligence like an ASIC or Microcontroller. Those boards are totally drive by that on-board intelligence, including a full firmware and embedded OS with the RAId logic. Your CPU _never_ directly accesses the disk. In fact, the OS driver is rather _simplistic_ (simple block transfers, possibly a few status commands) because the on-board ASIC/microcontroller handles queuing, caching/buffering, etc...
That fake RAID stuff has only one purpuse. To allow users of Windows XP Home/Professional to have software RAID. If Microsoft shipped software RAID drivers with Home/Professional (like they do with Server),
??? I thought XP Pro can use LDM and striping/mirroring, just like Windows 2000 Pro ???
those fake RAID controllers would never exist. Or to be more correct, the controllers would exist (since they are basically just regular SATA controllers), but you wouldn't see word RAID mentioned anywhere on them, and there would be no RAID settings
in their BIOS.
It's a marketing gimmick, with or without Microsoft's support.
"Bryan J. Smith" b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote:
??? I thought XP Pro can use LDM and striping/mirroring, just like Windows 2000 Pro ???
Just FYI, you have to use a Logical Disk Manager (LDM) Disk Label** (aka "Dynamic Disk") to use the software RAID features of Windows 2000 Pro and XP Pro (not sure about XP Home, what it offers).
This is a safety feature, as legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Labels (aka "Basic Disk" -- i.e., old Primary/Extended/Logical disk slices) can store inter-Disk Slice** dependencies/ associations.
LDM Disk Labels show up as a Disk Slice of type 42h in a legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Label.
It's the same reason why you should use a Logical Volume Management (LVM) Disk Slice when you use Linux's Software RAID, even when using the Multi Disk (MD) for your RAID. It will store Disk Slice associations, unlike a legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Label.
-- Bryan
**NOTE: I'm purposely using established UNIX terminology, instead of PC: Disk Slice ~ Partition Disk Label ~ Partition Table
Disk Labels can be encapsulated inside of Disk Slices. E.g., the "Extended" primary partition is really a new Disk Label (with "Logical" partitions) inside of a Disk Slice. Same deal with BSD Disk Labels, NT5+ (2000+) LDM Disk Labels, Linux LVM Disk Labels, etc... The legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Label has 0 storage other than the Disk Slices themselves (other than MBR and the partition table itself -- no meta-data, no journal, no geometry, etc...).
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
"Bryan J. Smith" b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote:
??? I thought XP Pro can use LDM and striping/mirroring, just like Windows 2000 Pro ???
Just FYI, you have to use a Logical Disk Manager (LDM) Disk Label** (aka "Dynamic Disk") to use the software RAID features of Windows 2000 Pro and XP Pro (not sure about XP Home, what it offers).
On 2000 Pro and XP Home/Pro, the option is there, but either grayed out or there's popup screen informing you that it works only on Server and up (don't remember anymore). You need to have at least Server version of Windows in order to use it. Unless of course you managed to hack something in the registry to enable it (in which case you violated licencing agreement, and sure, I'd like to know how you did it ;-). Currently, the only software RAID option for 2000 Pro and XP Home/Pro are those fake RAID controllers with their specialized drivers (I'm not aware of any 3rd party general purpuse software RAID drivers for Windows).
Of course, all this holds only if Microsoft hasn't decided to unlock the feature in one of the service packs (which I doubt).
Aleksandar Milivojevic alex@milivojevic.org wrote:
On 2000 Pro and XP Home/Pro, the option is there, but either grayed out
What is your "Disk Label"? "Basic" or "Dynamic"?
If you don't know, select: Control Panel -> Administrative Tools -> Computer Management Storage -> Disk Management
It will tell you either "Basic" (legacy BIOS/DOS pri/ext/log) or "Dynamic" (LDM).
Microsoft does not allow you do to volume management on "Basic" disks for the same reason I don't recommend people use MD on the same (and recommend LVM/LVD2 instead, even though MD is used for RAID-1 or RAID-5). There is no way to store meta-data pertinent to the RAID volume if you lose a slice. You _must_ use the LDM Disk Label to get _any_ volume management in NT5+ (2000+).
or there's popup screen informing you that it works only on Server and up (don't remember anymore). You need to have at least Server version of Windows in order to use it.
I don't know about XP Home, but I was fairly certain that XP Pro does very much do at least spanned (no RAID), striped (RAID-0, no redundancy) and, I believe, mirroring (RAID-1, redundant). RAID-5 (fka striping+parity) can only be on 200x Server.
Unless of course you managed to hack something in the registry to enable it (in which case you violated licencing agreement, and sure, I'd like to know how you did it ;-). Currently, the only software RAID option for 2000 Pro and XP Home/Pro are those fake RAID controllers with their specialized drivers (I'm not aware of any 3rd party general purpuse software RAID drivers for Windows).
There are a few volume manager suites out there. They are typically for servers (and priced at such) though.
Of course, all this holds only if Microsoft hasn't decided to unlock the feature in one of the service packs (which I doubt).
I think it's because you're not using a "Dynamic" disk. It _will_ be grayed out then. ;->
A quick search turned up the following MS KB articles:
[NT5.1] Windows XP: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/314343/
Ah ha! You are indeed correct!
"You cannot create mirrored volumes or RAID-5 volumes on Windows XP Home Edition, Windows XP Professional, or Windows XP 64-Bit Edition-based computers."
They _did_ take out "mirrored" support of the "clients" in NT5.1!
Also note ...
"NOTE: Dynamic disks are not supported on portable computers or on Windows XP Home Edition-based computers."
So XP Home can't do anything (I thought so, but wasn't sure).
Just for historical completeness ...
[NT5.0] Windows 2000: http://support.microsoft.com/kb/175761/
The LDM Disk Label (Dynamic Disk) was introduced with NT5.0. It solved the serious issues that many people had with the legacy BIOS/DOS Disk Label in "losing" RAID volumes back in NT4.0 and earlier.
So Microsoft _did_ remove mirrored (RAID-1) as an option in NT5.1 client OSes, from NT5.0. Interesting.
Hi,
I currently use Samba server as a PDC on a centos 3.5 box for a bunch of XP clients which works perfectly.</centos plug>
I want to mount a share on a NAS box we have kicking about and use that share to put all the users home dirs in. Sadly my NAS box is a Windows 2003 server appliance (although, to be fair - it does the job).
So I create a share on the NAS box, create a user on the Samba server who I then assign write permissions on the newly created share (yes, the NAS is a domain member) and then put the NAS share's details into the Samba server's /etc/fstab like so:
\nasboxen\newshare /mnt/userhomes smbfs auto,credentials=/etc/samba/afile 0 0
mount -a /mnt/syd01-test/
and it mounts perfectly:
[root@lemon mnt]# mount [snip] //nasboxen/newshare on /mnt/userhomes type smbfs (0)
Now the problem comes when I want to put a userdir in there because when I try and set the ownership:
[root@lemon mnt]# chown nick testing chown: changing ownership of `testing': Operation not permitted
I presume this is because it's a smb filesystem and it doesn't support unix ownership flags. So the question is... can it be done?
Cheers,
Nick
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 14:06 +1000, Nick Bryant wrote:
Hi,
I currently use Samba server as a PDC on a centos 3.5 box for a bunch of XP clients which works perfectly.</centos plug>
I want to mount a share on a NAS box we have kicking about and use that share to put all the users home dirs in. Sadly my NAS box is a Windows 2003 server appliance (although, to be fair - it does the job).
So I create a share on the NAS box, create a user on the Samba server who I then assign write permissions on the newly created share (yes, the NAS is a domain member) and then put the NAS share's details into the Samba server's /etc/fstab like so:
\nasboxen\newshare /mnt/userhomes smbfs auto,credentials=/etc/samba/afile 0 0
mount -a /mnt/syd01-test/
and it mounts perfectly:
[root@lemon mnt]# mount [snip] //nasboxen/newshare on /mnt/userhomes type smbfs (0)
Now the problem comes when I want to put a userdir in there because when I try and set the ownership:
[root@lemon mnt]# chown nick testing chown: changing ownership of `testing': Operation not permitted
I presume this is because it's a smb filesystem and it doesn't support unix ownership flags. So the question is... can it be done?
Maybe from an XP box using Windows Explorer and the "Security Permissions" ?
Cheers,
Nick
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 14:06 +1000, Nick Bryant wrote:
Hi,
I currently use Samba server as a PDC on a centos 3.5 box for a bunch of XP clients which works perfectly.</centos plug>
I want to mount a share on a NAS box we have kicking about and use that share to put all the users home dirs in. Sadly my NAS box is a Windows 2003 server appliance (although, to be fair - it does the job).
So I create a share on the NAS box, create a user on the Samba server who I then assign write permissions on the newly created share (yes, the NAS is a domain member) and then put the NAS share's details into the Samba server's /etc/fstab like so:
\nasboxen\newshare /mnt/userhomes smbfs auto,credentials=/etc/samba/afile 0 0
mount -a /mnt/syd01-test/
and it mounts perfectly:
[root@lemon mnt]# mount [snip] //nasboxen/newshare on /mnt/userhomes type smbfs (0)
Now the problem comes when I want to put a userdir in there because when I try and set the ownership:
[root@lemon mnt]# chown nick testing chown: changing ownership of `testing': Operation not permitted
I presume this is because it's a smb filesystem and it doesn't support unix ownership flags. So the question is... can it be done?
---- You can't have user permissions on 'foreign' file systems - all files and folders are owned by whomever mounts it.
You can download for free - Microsoft's SFU (Services for Unix) and create NFS exports from the NAS Appliance and mount them on the Linux/Unix system and share them but be prepared for some latency (I sort of gave up on this concept myself). You could also create a 'DFS' tree that has the 'base' on the Linux server and the subtrees on the NAS appliance.
Of course there is no reason that you can't direct Samba to create Windows Users 'HOMES' share directly on/from the NAS appliance itself and that is likely the best/fastest way to do it. Since the NAS Server is 'joined' to the domain, it will have all the user accounts and can happily deal with the ACL's for the home share.
With Samba 3.0.x and LDAP or tdbsam backend, you can specify a unique home and profile directory for each user and put them on different servers if you wish.
Craig
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 14:06 +1000, Nick Bryant wrote:
Hi,
I currently use Samba server as a PDC on a centos 3.5 box for a bunch of
XP
clients which works perfectly.</centos plug>
I want to mount a share on a NAS box we have kicking about and use that share to put all the users home dirs in. Sadly my NAS box is a Windows
2003
server appliance (although, to be fair - it does the job).
So I create a share on the NAS box, create a user on the Samba server
who I
then assign write permissions on the newly created share (yes, the NAS
is a
domain member) and then put the NAS share's details into the Samba
server's
/etc/fstab like so:
\nasboxen\newshare /mnt/userhomes smbfs
auto,credentials=/etc/samba/afile
0 0
mount -a /mnt/syd01-test/
and it mounts perfectly:
[root@lemon mnt]# mount [snip] //nasboxen/newshare on /mnt/userhomes type smbfs (0)
Now the problem comes when I want to put a userdir in there because when
I
try and set the ownership:
[root@lemon mnt]# chown nick testing chown: changing ownership of `testing': Operation not permitted
I presume this is because it's a smb filesystem and it doesn't support
unix
ownership flags. So the question is... can it be done?
You can't have user permissions on 'foreign' file systems - all files and folders are owned by whomever mounts it.
That explains the error then :)
You can download for free - Microsoft's SFU (Services for Unix) and create NFS exports from the NAS Appliance and mount them on the Linux/Unix system and share them but be prepared for some latency (I sort of gave up on this concept myself). You could also create a 'DFS' tree that has the 'base' on the Linux server and the subtrees on the NAS appliance.
Ok did this. Got NFS working on it... problem is that even though it doesn't bork with an error it still won't let me change the ownership. I think I know why but I don't know how to do a no_root_squash export on a W2k3 box of doom, and I won't go there on this list.
Of course there is no reason that you can't direct Samba to create Windows Users 'HOMES' share directly on/from the NAS appliance itself and that is likely the best/fastest way to do it. Since the NAS Server is 'joined' to the domain, it will have all the user accounts and can happily deal with the ACL's for the home share.
It seems a little more complex but sounds like it would be the way forwards. Do you have any more info on exactly how about you create a user with a non-local fs home dir?
With Samba 3.0.x and LDAP or tdbsam backend, you can specify a unique home and profile directory for each user and put them on different servers if you wish.
It's running on samba 3 with tdb backend...
Cheers,
Nick
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 16:26 +1000, Nick Bryant wrote:
You can't have user permissions on 'foreign' file systems - all files and folders are owned by whomever mounts it.
That explains the error then :)
You can download for free - Microsoft's SFU (Services for Unix) and create NFS exports from the NAS Appliance and mount them on the Linux/Unix system and share them but be prepared for some latency (I sort of gave up on this concept myself). You could also create a 'DFS' tree that has the 'base' on the Linux server and the subtrees on the NAS appliance.
Ok did this. Got NFS working on it... problem is that even though it doesn't bork with an error it still won't let me change the ownership. I think I know why but I don't know how to do a no_root_squash export on a W2k3 box of doom, and I won't go there on this list.
---- If I recall correctly, there was a check box on SFU when you create/edit the nfs exports to 'allow root access' - I also use the username mapping to map root <-> Administrator so Windows considers them to be one and the same. ----
Of course there is no reason that you can't direct Samba to create Windows Users 'HOMES' share directly on/from the NAS appliance itself and that is likely the best/fastest way to do it. Since the NAS Server is 'joined' to the domain, it will have all the user accounts and can happily deal with the ACL's for the home share.
It seems a little more complex but sounds like it would be the way forwards. Do you have any more info on exactly how about you create a user with a non-local fs home dir?
---- If you use usermgr.exe or the pdbedit command, you can put in the paths for their home and profile directories individually...
\NAS\USERS\craig \NAS\PROFILES\craig
man pdbedit ----
With Samba 3.0.x and LDAP or tdbsam backend, you can specify a unique home and profile directory for each user and put them on different servers if you wish.
It's running on samba 3 with tdb backend...
---- I tend to use LDAP and have some ability to edit ldif files directly which isn't an option with tdb.
Craig
Aleksandar Milivojevic wrote:
Bryan J. Smith wrote:
"Bryan J. Smith" b.j.smith@ieee.org wrote:
??? I thought XP Pro can use LDM and striping/mirroring, just like Windows 2000 Pro ???
Just FYI, you have to use a Logical Disk Manager (LDM) Disk Label** (aka "Dynamic Disk") to use the software RAID features of Windows 2000 Pro and XP Pro (not sure about XP Home, what it offers).
On 2000 Pro and XP Home/Pro, the option is there, but either grayed out or there's popup screen informing you that it works only on Server and up (don't remember anymore). You need to have at least Server version of Windows in order to use it. Unless of course you managed to hack something in the registry to enable it (in which case you violated licencing agreement, and sure, I'd like to know how you did it ;-).
If you can read german - there is a "raidpatch" (short) documentation and zipfile for W2K SP4 and WXP SP2 at http://www.heise.de/ct/ftp/05/03/090/ . The warning (at http://www.heise.de/ct/05/14/166/default.shtml) is: if a Microsoft patch affects the patched files then you might loose the functionality again - and maybe your data, too. So you should make an image of your system partition before you apply a MS patch.
hope this helps,
Kay
Currently, the only software RAID option for 2000 Pro and XP Home/Pro are those fake RAID controllers with their specialized drivers (I'm not aware of any 3rd party general purpuse software RAID drivers for Windows).
Of course, all this holds only if Microsoft hasn't decided to unlock the feature in one of the service packs (which I doubt).
Nick Bryant nick@everywhereinternet.com wrote:
Indeed. I freaked out when I couldn't get my sata promise raid controlling working in Acer Altos series servers... Till I read an article that said in 2.4 its actually just as quick (if not quicker, depending on server hardware) to let the kernel deal with the raid stuff.
The Logical Disk/Volume Management (LDM/LVM) of the OS is always going to order, schedule and commit far more efficiently than a FRAID driver (FRAID cards have *0* intelligence, only a "trick" 16-bit BIOS that is _useless_ once the OS boots).
Software RAID-0 may be faster than hardware (especially if spread over cards on separate PCI channels).
Software RAID-1 and 10 require the I/O commit 2x the data over hardware RAID, which just takes the 1:1 stream.
Software RAID-3/4/5 push _all_ data through the CPU-memory- I/O interconnect, and is detrimental on the limited CPU- memory-I/O interconnect (the XORs aren't the problem), whereas hardware RAID-3/4/5 just takes the 1:1 stream.
AFAIK the embedded Raid is simply software raid. Instead of bothering using drivers that simply do software raid you should be able to do it with MADM(if i remember the package name correctly)
Joseph T Mai wrote:
Sorry if this has been asked previously. Does CentOS support IDE hardware RAID on HP DL320? Thanks, -j _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-
Aleksandar Milivojevic -
Bryan J. Smith -
Craig White -
Jay Leafey -
Johnny Hughes -
Joseph T Mai -
Kay Diederichs -
Nick Bryant -
Phil Schaffner -
Tony Wicks -
Ugo Bellavance -
William Warren