ciradrak

Member
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ciradrak

  • Rank
    Member
  1. ciradrak

    Which Sata Raid5 Controller For Linux?

    At first I thought you were wrong, but I subscribed to the linux-scsi mailing list and studied the source more closely. Now, I don't know how I missed the Adaptec and LSI stuff in the first place. So I goofed, Adaptec and LSI definately have RAID support in the kernel. Furthermore the LSI guys are actively devevloping their drivers in the kernel and on the linux-scsi mailing list. drivers/scsi/megaraid.c -- LSI Megaraid drivers/scsi/dpt_i2o.c -- Adaptec I2O raid driver drivers/scsi/ips.c -- Adpatec/IBM ServeRAID drivers/scsi/aacraid/* -- Adpatec AACRAID Just for kicks, here's what I found in the 2.6.3 source code related to raid and SATA. drivers/scsi/3w-xxxx.c -- 3ware (looks like everything 3ware makes) drivers/scsi/sata_promise.c -- Promise SATA150 TX2 and TX4 drivers/scsi/sata_sil.c -- Silicon Image 3112 but not the 3114 drivers/ide/pci/siimage.c -- silicon Image (docs restricted by NDA) drivers/scsi/sata_via.c -- VIA 8237SATA drivers/ide/pci/generic.c -- VIA stuff drivers/ide/pci/piix.c -- Intel ICH5 drivers/scsi/sata_svw.c -- Broadcom stuff (is this right?) drivers/ide/pci/amd74xx.c -- nForce2 & nForce3 Ummm... well... not quite. http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/1735 Yeah.
  2. ciradrak

    Which Sata Raid5 Controller For Linux?

    I have only set up one raid system, so I don't have a lot of experience with raid. I do have considerable experience with linux OTOH. I did quite a bit of research before I discovered what we wanted in a raid sub system. The raid was to be used with a Netware sever and the management at the USDA were *very* price conscious. (Admirable for a government agency.) The whole subsystem cost about $1500. (We had a barrier at 2k which would have required undesirable red tape and authorization.) We used an IDE to SCSI raid5 3-in-2 enclosure system that fit inside the server host. It was sold to us by http://www.areasys.com/ At the time (~3 years ago) it gave us hardware raid, used low cost IDE disks (we used maxtors), and still gave us good performance by interfacing with the host through SCSI. What it didn't do was any reporting aside from the little lcd on the front of the unit. The feature that really made the difference, was that in an era of waning Netware it integrated extremely well. The Fact is that it should integrate well with any OS as the host system sees only one very large SCSI disk. cost break down: $330 X 3 for 180 GB disks (after raid and file system formating we had about 300GB usable space) $150 for scsi card (adaptec I believe) $500 for the 3-in-2 box I see that they have SATA versions of what we bought previously on their website. I don't have any knowledge that the Adaptec or LSI kernel modules are buggy. I would hope they wouldn't be as RAID systems are all about speed and reliability. But I have had repeated bad experiences with , nvidia, Promise, ...and was it VIA? (can't remember)... As a user mostly my greatest complaint simply has been that things have not worked correctly. After that, it was difficult to set them up, very time consuming. And last of all, I personally, have more non-x86 machines than x86 machines and a proprietary binary-only driver typically means (and I haven't seen one where this wasn't true -- meaning that they also released drivers for other architectures) that I can't use that hardware on a PowerPC or a MIPS or whatever. But 'buggy' has definitely been the biggest problem. Another problem that crops up is that they release a driver that run with 2.4.22 but then it fails to work with newer kernels. On a completely not-related-to-functionality note, most of these proprietary drivers are in violation of the GPLv2 under which the linux kernel is licensed, and are there fore not legal.
  3. ciradrak

    Dual Monitor Graphics Card For Text And Video

    Let's see, the difference between nVidia, ATI, and Matrox. nVidia is the fastest/cheapest for 3D, but it is very difficult to get AutoCAD to work with it (crashes all the time due to poorly written graphics drivers) (their linux drivers are also poor). ATI has the best cool graphics functions built into hardware, nifty shaders, bump mapping, etc. Matrox is the most durable, most likely to just work, and has the best drivers, best linux support, and the only video card manufacturer condoned by AutoDesk to work with their programs. All others have, crash and loose data bugs related to their drivers. Don't bother trying to run OrCAD with an nVidia either, bad bad bad. It dies and looses all your work. I remember it used to crash and corrupt the files you were working on to boot. Very bad. Use Matrox, not nVidia, unless you want to play games, for the cheapest price and don't mind fiddling to get it to work. So, the answer is: for 'text and video' it's Matrox all the way. ATI and nVidia are in the 3d-rendering realm.
  4. ciradrak

    Which Sata Raid5 Controller For Linux?

    How about one of those autonomous raid solutions where the host just sees one big scsi or ata drive? I bought a small one of those and have been fairly happy with it, after a firmware upgrade, and corrupt bios, and shipping back to the manufacturer for repair -- it has worked well. 3ware is the only one with decent support in the linux kernel though, the other two aren't in there, and I can't suggest using commercial drivers. (i just had a very bad experience with commercial drivers under linux.)
  5. Another possible option besides gimp is the spin off cinepaint. More targeted for the film industry, cinepaint supports a more extensive set of image formats. The Gimp project isn't very sensitive to the needs of their 'high end' users unfortunately, and they aren't interested in incorporating patches for those items either. Gimp really bogs down with anything over about 50MB and we regularly work on 350-500MB files. Gimp doesn't support high dynamic range or even 16bit images very well. Even Photoshop7's support for 16bit is poor. And color management in Gimp is nonexistent. (bummer for me) Pantone colors would be nice too. Now, you mentioned you need CMYK support, out of curiosity... why? If you are using a windows box to control your printing system, I believe you will find, upon detailed research, that windows *always* converts print out put to RGB space before it sends it out over the wire. Most printing RIP systems actually convert to RGB internally before they compute the final gammas for each of it's target inks. So unless you are using a kodak medium format digital back with direct CMYK output (or better), Mac OS, and a really awesome printing system (Heidelberg perhaps? aka a CMYK RIP); in other words, a CMYK work flow, I'm not sure why you would want CMYK in your graphic editor. But, even more puzzling, why didn't you ask about CMS support? Without color management, I really can't think of any reason to bother with CMYK, even with a CMYK work flow. Sorry for being nosy but I really love color and all it's intricacies and beauty. p.s. Oooh, I just checked the latest gimp 1.3 and it is linked against liblcms1, so maybe they do have or are at least working on color management... interesting. PS7 doesn't support HSV either. I need to get PS8. -- Eeew yucky, they have an activation system like Quark now. stupid. You know, I actually own a copy of quark express, but we haven't bothered to reactivate it after upgrading the os on that machine. Its kind of amazing that we have a thousand dollars sitting around idle because *I* can't get myself to call them up on the phone *again* to reactivate it. I really don't like activation systems. Humm, maybe you are right, adobe is going in an evil direction... Weren't they the ones that got that Russian cryptographer thrown in jail for discovering a bogus encryption method, even more infamous because it was adobe that was the one being ripped off... stupid. long live open source
  6. Sounds reasonable. Install windows first and then install linux. This will prevent windows from wiping out linux as it installs, and save you some head ache, as a first timer.
  7. Yeah, store the drive away in a safe and it should be good for a couple of decades. It really depends on what you are storing, and for how long. If your business is microfiche 20 years is not an acceptable life span, business operational data? financial data? maybe 20 years is long enough, i guess. Happily, I am a small business owner, or part owner, of a couple of enterprises. Currently the business that's doing the best is http://surroundviewmedia.com/ Hopefully it will keep growing and become profitable. Here's an example of using md5sum under linux. 1 cira@chaljin:/home/archive/Linux/yarrow-binary-i386-iso $ md5sum yarrow-i386-disk1.iso 76ef22495d186580e47efd8d7a65fe6b yarrow-i386-disc1.iso 2 cira@chaljin:/home/archive/Linux/yarrow-binary-i386-iso $
  8. Yes, I would be very cautious about what resellers tell you. It just kind of depends on how much reliability one wants. If you're the sort of person who runs md5sum on backups and then checks it when restoring. A MO drive will serve you better than a CD-R/DVD-R. You *will* see checksum failures on your *-R media. I sure have. But most people don't really care if they lose a few bits here and there. They just have the "oh well we lost one" attitude. If that's not good enough for you (it isn't for me) then you need something better. Personally I use multiple hard drives to make multiple copies on multiple machines, and then keep checksums. I just couldn't get myself to keep on top of a tape backup system or manually making CDs. Now it just runs, the backup machine gets the data from the servers and the workstations and no one has to do anything. Except perhaps if someone wants an old file or to restore if something went bad. ;-) The whole setup uses linux. And the old technology thing... well, they still use ferrite core memory in some space applications (not because they're antiquated -- they are) but because it stands up to all the radiation better than the new stuff. Just because its old doesn't mean it won't do what you want.
  9. I'm looking to get some SATA drives for use under linux using a Promise SATA150 and the 2.6.3 kernel. I love the reliability of my SCSI Seagate but last I heard there were serious performance issues with the Seagate SATA drives under linux. Even extreme hdparm tweaking yielded performance dimimuitive to a PATA drive. Did that ever get cleared up? If not, don't get a Seagate to use under linux. Untweaked the performance was abysimal <2MB/s see linux-questions-SATA-thread. After tweaking some people reported rates as high at 40MB/s, which isn't bad, but these drives should be able to do better. Seagate's PATA drives are faster than that I believe.
  10. All magnetic media will eventually succumb to magnetic dipole attraction and repulsion, sometimes called "bit drift". It's the phenomenon where the actual bits are attracted and repelled by their own magnetic fields. This is dependent on the hysteresis of the platter coating. The stronger the hysteresis the more stable the media, which is why a magnetic-optical drive is going to be more stable than a regular magnetic drive. If you want the "insanely great" method of storing data, nothing beats engraving on a precious metal such as gold or platinum, stainless steel would probably work well too. Ancient peoples all over the world knew this secret well. I went to a presentation where a company was offering a service of micro engraving data onto precious metals using english text. Don't worry it was usually read and written by a computer. A micro OCR / laser printer sort of thing. Like microfiche but a thousand times smaller. The idea was that when one goes to truly archive their data, high technology has innumerably flaws which make it completely unsuitable for long term storage. Technologies change and disappear while your old equipment rots away and fails. Then you're stuck in the position the USGS found themselves in a few years back, with thousands of 2 foot diameter reels of mag-tape that's dropping bits like they were pop corn and no functional tape readers. Using a human language character set, rather than bits , the data can be stored in a format that, while still computer readable, can be read by something as low-tech as a man with a microscope. Ah, I found a company doing this kind of work. I think it's a different company from the first though. www.norsam.com/hdrosetta.htm Any way, stamped silver CDs are pretty stable, much better than CD-Rs or hard drives, fairly inexpensive, fairly common, and not as exotic as the micro-engraving method. I'm not sure which would come out on top, a MO drive or a stamped CD, but you can get a stamped silver made for less than a thousand USD. www.goldenrom.com or someone similar could probably do it for you. Good luck finding what you want. :-)