Brett Serkez spake the following on 4/2/2007 2:06 PM: >> > No, it is an older PIII with two IDE hard drives plugged into the >> > motherboard. To the best of my knowledge, this is not the case. >>> >> It was common for some boards in that era to still have a promise ide >> chip >> embedded in them. > > I rebooted so I could check the BIOS and checked the boot messages > with dmesg. I see no evidence of an sort of RAID controller. Here > are the relevant dmesg messages: > > ide: Assuming 33MHz system bus speed for PIO modes; override with idebus=xx > ICH: IDE controller at PCI slot 0000:00:1f.1 > ICH: chipset revision 2 > ICH: not 100% native mode: will probe irqs later > ide0: BM-DMA at 0xffa0-0xffa7, BIOS settings: hda:DMA, hdb:pio > ide1: BM-DMA at 0xffa8-0xffaf, BIOS settings: hdc:DMA, hdd:DMA > Probing IDE interface ide0... > hda: Maxtor 36147H8, ATA DISK drive > ide0 at 0x1f0-0x1f7,0x3f6 on irq 14 > Probing IDE interface ide1... > hdc: CRD-8400B, ATAPI CD/DVD-ROM drive > hdd: Maxtor 4D060H3, ATA DISK drive > hdc: Disabling (U)DMA for CRD-8400B (blacklisted) > ide1 at 0x170-0x177,0x376 on irq 15 > hda: max request size: 128KiB > hda: 117231408 sectors (60022 MB) w/512KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63, UDMA(66) > hda: cache flushes not supported > hda: hda1 hda2 > hdd: max request size: 128KiB > hdd: 120069936 sectors (61475 MB) w/2048KiB Cache, CHS=65535/16/63, > UDMA(66) > hdd: cache flushes not supported > hdd: hdd1 hdd2 > > Brett You might get better performance if the second drive is a master instead of a slave. Looking at the dmraid man page, is it possible that the drives were in place on a raid system previously? It might be seeing the metadata and thinking it is a raid array. http://www.linuxmanpages.com/man8/dmraid.8.php -- MailScanner is like deodorant... You hope everybody uses it, and you notice quickly if they don't!!!!