× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.


  1.  Home
  2. MIDRANGE-L
  3. March 2024

Re: 8203-E4A RAID5 vs. ASP protection

If the customer wanted to add three drives to fill the chassis up, the system would try to create a new RAID set as opposed to adding the drives to the current set. It would fail since it needed four units at the time. So we would do it twice, once with two, then the single. With only two units it would simply add them to the current RAID set.

Technically the best plan would be to stop RAID and restart it to get the RAID striping across all the drives but as you discovered that was a really long process most customers would not tolerate.


Jim Oberholtzer
Agile Technology Architects

On Mar 2, 2024, at 8:54 AM, Patrik Schindler <poc@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

We used to fight with that aspect of starting RAID all the time. When adding drives, we would add them two at a time so we could include them in the RAID.

Can you elaborate on that? What's the benefit of doing this incrementally instead of all at once?

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...
Follow-Ups:
Replies:
Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.