<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: RAID</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.prepressure.com</link>
	<description>Prepress, printing, PDF, PostScript, Fonts and stuff...</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:14:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Meathead</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-152885</link>
		<dc:creator>Meathead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:45:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-152885</guid>
		<description>Ignore that, just realised one is 7200 PRM and the other is 5400 RPM. Will need to upgrade the latter anyway</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ignore that, just realised one is 7200 PRM and the other is 5400 RPM. Will need to upgrade the latter anyway</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Meathead</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-152884</link>
		<dc:creator>Meathead</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 14:42:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-152884</guid>
		<description>I have a question and can&#039;t seem to find the answer.

I have two 500GB SATA drives, but one has 16mb cache, while the other has 8mb cache.

Would these be okay in a RAID 0 ? Or should the drives be identical in all aspects (not just storage space)? Would the performance enhancement not be worth the bother (Compared to 2x 500GB 16mb cache)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have a question and can&#8217;t seem to find the answer.</p>
<p>I have two 500GB SATA drives, but one has 16mb cache, while the other has 8mb cache.</p>
<p>Would these be okay in a RAID 0 ? Or should the drives be identical in all aspects (not just storage space)? Would the performance enhancement not be worth the bother (Compared to 2x 500GB 16mb cache)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-139591</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 02:16:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-139591</guid>
		<description>When a product specify this:

RAID0/1/LARGE/3/CLONE/5/10

What is LARGE and CLONE?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>When a product specify this:</p>
<p>RAID0/1/LARGE/3/CLONE/5/10</p>
<p>What is LARGE and CLONE?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geekthinker</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-130709</link>
		<dc:creator>Geekthinker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2012 06:57:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-130709</guid>
		<description>It is a safeguard WHEN the storage system gets stolen

what are you implying...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It is a safeguard WHEN the storage system gets stolen</p>
<p>what are you implying&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ray Clancy</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-118658</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray Clancy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 02:50:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-118658</guid>
		<description>Running raid0 bootable, partitioned with 2 drives, boot and root, minimum swap on cf cards.

Desire to --grow to a third device.

Such was possible with the following:

mdadm --grow /dev/md0 --raid-devices=3 --add /dev/sdxx

Error occurs:  mdadm /dev/md0; could not set level to raid4.....
Normal procedure is to use raid4 to resync and then revert back to raid0.

Why does this procedure fail?  It used to work....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Running raid0 bootable, partitioned with 2 drives, boot and root, minimum swap on cf cards.</p>
<p>Desire to &#8211;grow to a third device.</p>
<p>Such was possible with the following:</p>
<p>mdadm &#8211;grow /dev/md0 &#8211;raid-devices=3 &#8211;add /dev/sdxx</p>
<p>Error occurs:  mdadm /dev/md0; could not set level to raid4&#8230;..<br />
Normal procedure is to use raid4 to resync and then revert back to raid0.</p>
<p>Why does this procedure fail?  It used to work&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Laurens</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-98810</link>
		<dc:creator>Laurens</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Sep 2011 07:56:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-98810</guid>
		<description>No it isn&#039;t</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>No it isn&#8217;t</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe C.</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-98276</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:16:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-98276</guid>
		<description>One additional ques:  I assume RAID 5 is the same as RAID 4+1?  Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One additional ques:  I assume RAID 5 is the same as RAID 4+1?  Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe C.</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-98274</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe C.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Sep 2011 20:15:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-98274</guid>
		<description>Hello:

Can someone tell me if RAID 4+2 is the same as RAID 6?

Any input is appreciated.

Joe
ATT Corp
West Demoines IA</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hello:</p>
<p>Can someone tell me if RAID 4+2 is the same as RAID 6?</p>
<p>Any input is appreciated.</p>
<p>Joe<br />
ATT Corp<br />
West Demoines IA</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: RAKHILESH</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-96701</link>
		<dc:creator>RAKHILESH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 04:31:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-96701</guid>
		<description>what is raid7?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>what is raid7?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Vishu</title>
		<link>http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-96059</link>
		<dc:creator>Vishu</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2011 12:07:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.prepressure.com/library/technology/raid#comment-96059</guid>
		<description>How to define RAID 5 performance for 8*600 GB? For rotating Disc.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How to define RAID 5 performance for 8*600 GB? For rotating Disc.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.338 seconds -->

