Comments for Alex Hopmann's Blog http://www.alexhopmann.com Modern Art makes me want to rock out Tue, 22 May 2012 15:59:22 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 Comment on Silicon Image SATARAID5 and Reboots by Darron http://www.alexhopmann.com/2008/07/28/silicon-image-sataraid5-and-reboots/comment-page-2/#comment-223659 Darron Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:55:40 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/2008/07/28/silicon-image-sataraid5-and-reboots/#comment-223659 Odd? I do not have the Check Pointing option? I am building a new RAID array and the check point option is nowhere to be seen? It was there before, so I can only assume the latest drivers or software (which I am using) has removed this? Does this mean it is disabled by default? I do not really want to wait for a few days to see if this works... Odd?

I do not have the Check Pointing option?

I am building a new RAID array and the check point option is nowhere to be seen? It was there before, so I can only assume the latest drivers or software (which I am using) has removed this?

Does this mean it is disabled by default?

I do not really want to wait for a few days to see if this works…

]]> Comment on Silicon Image SATARAID5 and Reboots by Darron http://www.alexhopmann.com/2008/07/28/silicon-image-sataraid5-and-reboots/comment-page-2/#comment-223658 Darron Fri, 13 Jan 2012 11:53:43 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/2008/07/28/silicon-image-sataraid5-and-reboots/#comment-223658 Hi Guys, I stumbled on this site after having this issue for the fist time. I have been trying to copy about 5Tb of data back to the new RAID5 volume from various smaller drives on my system. After a break in copying (all data copied from one of the disks) I let the system reboot as Windows Update was bugging me. Following this reboot, the RAID array wanted to rebuild again - not what I needed after several days of rebuilding and copying of data! The RAID array is slow enough without trying to copy data during a rebuild! I decided to start again disable check-pointing as per the fix above and hopefully this will resolve the issue. In direct response to TTP above, I found that if I remove all drives (except 1) I can delete the broken RAID group without needing to wait for the rebuild to finish. I then added one drive at a time and deleted each time. When all drives were re-added and raid group deleted I could then re-create the RAID5 group! That saved me a few days! Hi Guys,

I stumbled on this site after having this issue for the fist time. I have been trying to copy about 5Tb of data back to the new RAID5 volume from various smaller drives on my system. After a break in copying (all data copied from one of the disks) I let the system reboot as Windows Update was bugging me.

Following this reboot, the RAID array wanted to rebuild again - not what I needed after several days of rebuilding and copying of data! The RAID array is slow enough without trying to copy data during a rebuild!

I decided to start again disable check-pointing as per the fix above and hopefully this will resolve the issue.

In direct response to TTP above, I found that if I remove all drives (except 1) I can delete the broken RAID group without needing to wait for the rebuild to finish. I then added one drive at a time and deleted each time. When all drives were re-added and raid group deleted I could then re-create the RAID5 group! That saved me a few days!

]]> Comment on Wine in a Blender by brett http://www.alexhopmann.com/2012/01/04/wine-in-a-blender/comment-page-1/#comment-221942 brett Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:16:05 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/?p=628#comment-221942 i've had sous vide steaks at a couple of high end restaurants (assuming they'd know how to do a killer job), and can't say i was very impressed. yes, it was dialed into the exact temp; but it felt sterile and had in both cases a hint of plastics. felt and tasted like a very unskillful way to cook meat. i’ve had sous vide steaks at a couple of high end restaurants (assuming they’d know how to do a killer job), and can’t say i was very impressed. yes, it was dialed into the exact temp; but it felt sterile and had in both cases a hint of plastics. felt and tasted like a very unskillful way to cook meat.

]]> Comment on Silicon Image SATARAID5 and Reboots by TTP http://www.alexhopmann.com/2008/07/28/silicon-image-sataraid5-and-reboots/comment-page-2/#comment-221694 TTP Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:33:40 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/2008/07/28/silicon-image-sataraid5-and-reboots/#comment-221694 OK massive issues for me... First off is there ANY way to delete the RAID array with-out it doing the 73 hours of restoring redundancy? After HOURS of experimenting I finally found a way.... Please note ensure you don't want any of the data on the drive! In other words back it up! Disable your on-board SATA if it's BIOS prevents you from seeing the card BIOS (which mine does, not usually an issue as I can use the SATARAID5 tool). Create a RAID0 (not 5!) array, reboot, turn the on-board SATA back on. Reboot, then go into windows, ensure you delete the old array in the SATARAID5 tool, convert the BIOS made one (right click on it). Use the drive (Quick format, etc) to ensure the old one is gone for good, then delete the RAID0 and reboot again and.... it's gone! FINALLY! YAY! This was actually the only way I could even remake the drive setup correctly (turn off checkpoint). This may have been due it originally being made on another system but unconfirmed... Also note this occured in thanks to windows "repairing" the drive after rebooting after spending 68 hours of array creation... Windows 7 decided it should repair the drive for me, isn't it great? Now to wait yet another 48 hours of array creation... I also trialed the rebooting to ensure it doesn't do the RR, thanks a lot to all who added comments and assistance above! OK massive issues for me… First off is there ANY way to delete the RAID array with-out it doing the 73 hours of restoring redundancy? After HOURS of experimenting I finally found a way….

Please note ensure you don’t want any of the data on the drive! In other words back it up!

Disable your on-board SATA if it’s BIOS prevents you from seeing the card BIOS (which mine does, not usually an issue as I can use the SATARAID5 tool).
Create a RAID0 (not 5!) array, reboot, turn the on-board SATA back on.
Reboot, then go into windows, ensure you delete the old array in the SATARAID5 tool, convert the BIOS made one (right click on it).
Use the drive (Quick format, etc) to ensure the old one is gone for good, then delete the RAID0 and reboot again and…. it’s gone! FINALLY! YAY!

This was actually the only way I could even remake the drive setup correctly (turn off checkpoint). This may have been due it originally being made on another system but unconfirmed…

Also note this occured in thanks to windows “repairing” the drive after rebooting after spending 68 hours of array creation… Windows 7 decided it should repair the drive for me, isn’t it great?

Now to wait yet another 48 hours of array creation… I also trialed the rebooting to ensure it doesn’t do the RR, thanks a lot to all who added comments and assistance above!

]]> Comment on Details of the New Desktop PC for 2011 by Alex http://www.alexhopmann.com/2011/11/29/details-of-the-new-desktop-pc-for-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-216823 Alex Thu, 08 Dec 2011 18:35:57 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/?p=616#comment-216823 I haven't measured the performance myself directly, but I was talking about this with someone else last night and they said a friend had measured and that boot from VHD was actually faster than raw-disk, at least on a SSD. I'm not sure how that really makes sense, but my experience is the system is extremely fast when accessing anything on the system drive & boot times are amazing. I haven’t measured the performance myself directly, but I was talking about this with someone else last night and they said a friend had measured and that boot from VHD was actually faster than raw-disk, at least on a SSD. I’m not sure how that really makes sense, but my experience is the system is extremely fast when accessing anything on the system drive & boot times are amazing.

]]> Comment on Details of the New Desktop PC for 2011 by Sriram Krishnan http://www.alexhopmann.com/2011/11/29/details-of-the-new-desktop-pc-for-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-216651 Sriram Krishnan Thu, 08 Dec 2011 05:39:23 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/?p=616#comment-216651 I'm curious - have you seen any perf issues with booting from VHD? Really tempted to do it but worried about disk virtualization overhead I’m curious - have you seen any perf issues with booting from VHD? Really tempted to do it but worried about disk virtualization overhead

]]> Comment on Details of the New Desktop PC for 2011 by Upgrades- 16gb of RAM and Radeon 6950 Hacks » Alex Hopmann’s Blog http://www.alexhopmann.com/2011/11/29/details-of-the-new-desktop-pc-for-2011/comment-page-1/#comment-216529 Upgrades- 16gb of RAM and Radeon 6950 Hacks » Alex Hopmann’s Blog Wed, 07 Dec 2011 19:36:04 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/?p=616#comment-216529 [...] quick updates on the new desktop PC before I get around to writing up more about the build process. First of all I mentioned in the [...] [...] quick updates on the new desktop PC before I get around to writing up more about the build process. First of all I mentioned in the [...]

]]> Comment on Hardware Updates (Why Companies Avoid Pre-announcing New Products) by New Desktop and Media PC Builds November 2011 » Alex Hopmann’s Blog http://www.alexhopmann.com/2007/07/18/hardware-updates-why-companies-avoid-pre-announcing-new-products/comment-page-1/#comment-213663 New Desktop and Media PC Builds November 2011 » Alex Hopmann’s Blog Mon, 21 Nov 2011 20:53:17 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/2007/07/18/hardware-updates-why-companies-avoid-pre-announcing-new-products/#comment-213663 [...] are getting new Sandy Bridge processors and new smaller cases with mini-ITX motherboards. The old Media PC was in a fancy “media case” which was about the size of a big receiver and the new one is more like [...] [...] are getting new Sandy Bridge processors and new smaller cases with mini-ITX motherboards. The old Media PC was in a fancy “media case” which was about the size of a big receiver and the new one is more like [...]

]]> Comment on LED Lightbulbs in the Home by Greenley http://www.alexhopmann.com/2011/01/03/led-lightbulbs-in-the-home/comment-page-1/#comment-204805 Greenley Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:37:33 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/?p=604#comment-204805 I was looking into getting some LED bulbs at the following site http://www.gogreenledbulbs.com/ but I realized that the stuff at Home Depot looks much cheaper. Does Home Depot offer refrigerator lights like this site does? Thanks! I was looking into getting some LED bulbs at the following site http://www.gogreenledbulbs.com/ but I realized that the stuff at Home Depot looks much cheaper. Does Home Depot offer refrigerator lights like this site does? Thanks!

]]> Comment on SATA vs. SAS vs. SSD by ambboy http://www.alexhopmann.com/2009/10/28/sata-vs-sas-vs-ssd/comment-page-1/#comment-193079 ambboy Mon, 06 Jun 2011 14:37:09 +0000 http://www.alexhopmann.com/?p=564#comment-193079 Right logic, wrong numbers for SATA. Most SATA numbers I see (theoretical and real-world) put the IOPS for SATA at around 40. Why? The command queue has only a single-path and is only 32 while SAS has a command queue of 64 and two paths per disk. After adjusting for the more realistic IOPS number, the SATA iops/$ should be 0.40 iops/$. This number more accurately reflects the penalty. However, when you factor in the longer rebuild times that require you to use RAID6, the penalty for using SATA in anything but low write IOPS environments becomes more apparent. With SAS becoming common (less expensive), SATA will slowly go away. Right logic, wrong numbers for SATA. Most SATA numbers I see (theoretical and real-world) put the IOPS for SATA at around 40. Why? The command queue has only a single-path and is only 32 while SAS has a command queue of 64 and two paths per disk.
After adjusting for the more realistic IOPS number, the SATA iops/$ should be 0.40 iops/$.
This number more accurately reflects the penalty. However, when you factor in the longer rebuild times that require you to use RAID6, the penalty for using SATA in anything but low write IOPS environments becomes more apparent. With SAS becoming common (less expensive), SATA will slowly go away.

]]>