[rescue] Filesystem choice for fileserver?

Lionel Peterson lionel4287 at verizon.net
Fri Apr 25 08:14:13 CDT 2008

>From: Shannon Hendrix <shannon at widomaker.com>
>Date: 2008/04/24 Thu PM 10:45:19 CDT
>To: The Rescue List <rescue at sunhelp.org>
>Subject: Re: [rescue] Filesystem choice for fileserver?

>On Apr 20, 2008, at 00:42 , Lionel Peterson wrote:
>> Following your logic, in order to sell a controller as "hardware  
>> RAID" you'd have to fully implement RAID functionality in hard-wired  
>> gates, with no "soft logic" inside? That threshold is a bit high - I  
>> think it would be fair to set the bar at "RAID implemented to not  
>> rely on host RAM and/or CPU"...

I should also have included "software on the host system" (no need for special drivers, etc.), but I thought that "host RAM" sort of covered that... IMHO, an add-in card that completely handles all RAID controller work, and simply presents itself as a disk drive controller, with each "container" presented to the OS as if it were a single, physical device would qualify as a hardware-implementation.

>Following my logic would have led you to a joke.

I guess I didn't follow it... ;^)

>Hardware RAID is a coprocessor.  Same basic definition applies.  The  
>work is not being done by the host.



More information about the rescue mailing list