STL

Member
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About STL

  • Rank
    Member
  1. STL

    Booting From 29320-r

    The apparent solution is to put the SCSI RAID card /topmost/. My cards used to go: AGP 5950 Ultra PCI 1 empty (for dual-height video cards in the future) PCI 2 8506-8 SATA RAID PCI 3 29320-R SCSI RAID PCI 4 Audigy 2 ZS PCI 5 empty (USB 2.0/FireWire bracket) I swapped the SATA RAID and SCSI RAID cards so that the SCSI RAID is on top, and it looks like I can now put both the system partition and the boot partition on the SCSI RAID array.
  2. Trivial. Photoshop 7.0: Rectangular Marquee Tool > Style > Fixed Aspect Ratio > Width 4, Height 6. Now you can select a chunk of the image and it will always be in the correct aspect ratio. Image > Crop to make rocket go now. If the images have to be a certain number of pixels on a side, then as a postprocessing step, use Photoshop to batch-resize everything.
  3. STL

    Booting From 29320-r

    If I provide SATA RAID-5 drivers as well as SCSI RAID-1 drivers, I can put a system partition on the SATA RAID-5 array and the boot partition on the SCSI RAID-1 array. I do not want to have to resort to this solution. If I did, would it be possible to swap SATA RAID-5 arrays in the future and copy the necessary files over? Could the problem be caused by having the SATA RAID-5 array in the system to begin with, even when I do not provide its drivers to XP? Would removing the card until Windows is fully installed allow me to put both the system and boot partitions on the SCSI RAID-1 array? Could the problem be that the SATA RAID-5 card is physically above (closer to the AGP card) the SCSI RAID-1 card? In my current system, my extra IDE controller card is below the SCSI card, which was first in the system.
  4. STL

    Booting From 29320-r

    I tried turning off HostRAID. XP Setup can't see the drives. Still stumped....
  5. STL

    Case For 10-15 Hard Drives

    The Lian Li PC-76 can hold precisely 20 hard drives (19, if you must retain an optical). That's 12 internal small bays, 2 external small bays, and 6 external large bays. 2-large-to-3-small converter brackets do not work on the PC-76, unfortunately (I had to verify this for myself). Unless you feel like removing the drive covers.
  6. STL

    Booting From 29320-r

    If the drivers are not F6-loaded, the array is not recognized in Setup, and the Recovery Console will simply not start. A nutbar at Experts Exchange says: > YES, don't do F6 during installation. Let XP find a good-enough driver for > the installation, then AFTER everything is installed, simply upgrade the > SCSI driver, and LATER bind the RAID. I think he's suggesting that I disable HostRAID, use non-HostRAID drivers, install to a singlet MAS, and once XP is running, turn on HostRAID and dupe the drive. Will that work? > Personally, I would never run a SCSI RAID as the primary boot drive on XP -- > 2000 and 2003 yes, but not XP. This guy is nuts. > You'd be a lot smarter to get an IDE or SATA drive for the OS, and RAID it > to one of the SCSI's -- people will say you can't do this, but yes, you > can. This is even nuttier, and not possible in hardware. > when the SCSI controller fails, not only are your drives unbootable, but > ALL -- i.e. ALL -- your data is lost, since the encoding is proprietary to > the SCSI controlller. And this is pure bullshit. But the singlet thing might work. What do you think?
  7. STL

    Booting From 29320-r

    I should add that, if I load in the HostRAID drivers and go into the Recovery Console, I can access C: (the RAID-1 array) just fine.
  8. I am building a system with two Fujitsu MAS3735NP drives in RAID-1 on an Adaptec 29320-R. The drives are on the same cable, and that cable is attached to channel B - that's the connector closest to the bracket. The terminator is past the drives, not past the card. The cable has no bent pins. I have flashed the card to BIOS 4.30.0. Channel A is also set to HostRAID, though no drives are on it. There is a SATA RAID-5 array in the system, but XP can't see it yet because I haven't given it the proper drivers. No other hard drives are connected. Four opticals are on IDE. When installing XP, I push F6 to load in Adaptec's most recent HostRAID drivers, 1.02.63. I can then make a partition on the RAID-1 array and install XP there. When installation finishes and the machine reboots, I take out the CD and floppy, and I get the following message eventually: "Windows could not start because of a computer disk hardware configuration problem. Could not read from the selected boot disk. Check boot path and disk hardware. Please check the Windows documentation about hardware disk configuration and your hardware reference manuals for additional information." Does anyone know how I can fix this and boot from SCSI? The last time I built a computer, I used a single X15-36LP on a 29160N, and XP just magically worked (no additional drivers ever installed). http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=314477 #2 did not help - it just made a near-duplicate entry in the boot.ini. Is the problem multi(0) vs. scsi(0) in boot.ini? MS says, "NOTE: If the system uses IDE, EIDE, ESDI drives, or a SCSI adapter with no built in BIOS replace "SCSI" with "Multi"." However, my current 29160N system uses multi(0) and boots just fine. Stephan T. Lavavej http://nuwen.net
  9. [isochar] > I'll forgive you since you don't frequent the forums often. I haven't posted very much in the new forums, as I bought my new computer in January 2002 and haven't been interested very much in hardware since. That doesn't mean that I don't *frequent* the forums. > As seen in a recent Maximum PC article, which can be seen in this thread, Microsoft has acknowledged > the problem and know what it is. However, >> a previous NTFS fix doesn't solve the problem, nor does the upcoming Service Pack 1. I couldn't really care less about information from an old issue of a magazine. The fact is that SP-1 includes a fix for slow SCSI-NTFS performance, and no one has yet discussed it. I want to know if this is truly the fix for this problem, or not. Experimentation is the only answer.
  10. [rocketmanx] > Microsofts already stated SP1 WON'T fix the problem. [isochar] > [sP1] does not fix this problem Are you SURE? From http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?.../SP1FixList.asp , the list of fixes in SP1, there is: http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?...b;en-us;Q308219 > Hard Disk Performance Is Slower Than You Expect > The information in this article applies to: > Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition > Microsoft Windows XP Professional > SYMPTOMS > After you install Microsoft Windows XP, hard disk performance may be slower than you expect. > NOTE: Hard disk performance may be even slower when your computer performs many small > hard disk read/write operations. > CAUSE > This behavior may occur in the following situation: > You use Small Computer System Interface (SCSI) hard disks in the computer. > -and- > The hard disks are formatted as NTFS. ... > STATUS > Microsoft has confirmed that this is a problem in the Microsoft products that are listed at the > beginning of this article. This problem was first corrected in Windows XP Service Pack 1. That sure looks like the issue being described, doesn't it? I have an XP Pro/X15-36LP/NTFS system (my Northwood), but I won't have physical access to it until Sept. 19, so I can't confirm this firsthand. -- Stephan T. Lavavej
  11. STL

    How much is too much computer

    You can never, ever have "too much computer". Ever.
  12. STL

    Critique My Resume

    Davin said: > I won't speak for Eugene, but I can say that personally I'm not very > enthusiastic about turning over the reigns of SR to anyone. SR is far > more than just a collection of files on a server. This place has deeper > value that transcends mere economics. Even if we were to be > handsomely bought out, Eugene and I would cringe and wince over > every change to our beloved site. It would be hard as hell to see SR > carried on without us prominently in the mix. The way I see it, there > are only a handful of favorable outcomes. The most likely outcome is > the complete dissipation of SR. Davin, what about the preservation of SR's reviews? They will slowly become outdated, but as of now they are still relevant and will continue to be so for several years. Would it be acceptable to archive SR's reviews, unchanged, and make them available to the public? Not that I've begun such a thing.
  13. "Whenever they burn books, they will also, in the end, burn people" - Heinrich Heine
  14. STL

    Horrified

    Whether or not old posts are important - Tannin, if it was important to you to archive your old posts, then you should have copied them to a text file, saved them, and burned them to CD or your storage medium of choice. Remember the First Law of Everything: If you want it done right, you have to do it yourself.