LHJ

If it does not work out, I will have to place the drive somewhere else in the case. Not terribly lot of space there, but it is possible. But I would have to drill new mounting holes, and it would probably also rule out a slim-optical, but that might be okay. But I hope that the ordered cable works Btw, nice to be back to SR. Was a regular reader many years ago.

I think that I have found a cable at CpuStuff that will work, so I ordered: Side-angle SATA-cable at CpuStuff The shipping was quite more expensive than the cable itself, but it was the only company I found selling this kind of cable.

I am building in an SSD into a cramped mini-ITX box, and there too little space above, under or behind the drive to fit a straight SATA-cable, or a cable that is angled upwards or downwards. I therefore ask if anyone knows about a SATA-cable that runs sideways, like this power cord: http://www.showmecables.com/catalog/large/3152L.jpg

If you are not dependent on any special Windows-only application, you can get the freedom and speedy feeling that Linux can give (smile == no religious OS war intended/wanted) Reading your mail made me philosophical, forgive me but... I also like my computer and software to be quick and "to the task", and it wonders me how much more "extra work" the poor computers have to do all the time, as they get qicker. If you work twice as fast, you will have to do twice the work! When something takes to long time, you ideally want to optimise that part. You can not eliminate all work in life, if you, for example, are to show a series of 4 MB large images, you will have to transfer them from the disk to the main memory/graphics memory. But it is my feeling that a lot of bits and bytes are beeing moved around without any purpose. Of course it might be easier to write programs and operating systems that way, which is then a valid reason. Even so, if you are like me it is hard not getting amazed by Chuck Moor's ideas present in ColorForth, a favourite read of mine!

One month has now passed, and the following has happened: 1. Read errors (ECC corrected) has jumped from 354 to 4433! 2. Have run the SCSIMAX-tool, but it says that everything is fine. 3. Mounted the drive in a friend's computer (different controller, cable and terminator), and the error count increased there too. * What can be causing this, do you think? * You who own a 15KII, what does S.M.A.R.T report to You? S.M.A.R.T readings

Hello everyone! I finally got me self a new drive for my home linux system, a 36GB Maxtor 15KII adding some storage and speed over my, now rather oldish, 18GB IBM Ultrastar 36LZX 10k drive that was filled to the rim. As I am quite interested in hardware reliability, I am running the smartd/smartctl software to monitor that my drives are doing well and are not getting overly hot. After copying the root-fs and /usr to new disc, I run smartctl --all /dev/sda for the new drive, and found some interesting figures: Current start stop count: 1074003968 times for my old drive this values reads: 1101 times, which seems accurate for the old drive. Moreover, the error counter log says: Errors corrected by ECC (fast) 430, and this value has grown from 182 the first time i looked (just after copying the system earlier today), the old drive has a zero-value here! To see before/after results for the drives, please visit SMART readings. Any hints on how shall I interpret these values?

Oops, that's the drive I have in my computer (18GB 36LZX). Linux says: Vendor: IBM Model: DDYS-T18350N Rev: S96H What are/were the problems with these drives?

I am aware of that. Any drive might fail, that is why I thought of RAID-1. It also seems that I am to lazy to make frequent backups, so if one drive fails, I could still have my data intact. It is probably better to set up some automatic backing scheme, copying from one drive to another. That will then protect me from misstakes made by me self, deleting wrong files etc. Yours,

Hi all! I have outgrown my current harddisk (IBM 36LZX 18GB) and am thinking of adding another drive. My first thought was to add one of the new silent 15K drives available, but then came to the idea, that maybe two SATA-disks in RAID 1 would actually give me better reliability. My system is not misson critical, people does not get killed if it is not up and runnging, but I like it to be as stable as possible, minimising the risk of data loss. I have a Intel D875PBZLK motherboard with ICH5-R. How would this handle two disks in RAID 1? My operating system is Debian "sarge" using kernel v2.4. Workstation usage, text editing/previewing, program development, compiling. /jonas My current hardware: -------------------- P4 2.8GHz D875PBZLK w. 1GB PC3200 ECC RAM. Tekram U3W U160 SCSI-controller (PCI) - IBM Utrastar 36LZX 18GB Harddisk (on LVD channel) - Yamaha 3200S CD/RW (on SE channel) 2 x Matrox millenium (I & II) graphic cards. (2 x PCI) Soundblaster PCI 128 (Ensoniq 1371) sound card (PCI).

I have another question regarding drive activity LEDs, My motherboard (Intel D875PBZLK) has a SCSI-led header. The manual does not tell how to use this. Shall I connect the LED header (output) from the controller (Tekram U3W) to the header on the motherboard? The thing is that I don't know if the header on the MB is for driving a led, or for reading another led output, mixing it with activity controlled by the chipset. /jonas