Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2007 10:04:53 -0400 From: Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@msu.edu> To: Klaus Friis =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D8stergaard?= <farremosen@gmail.com> Cc: Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@msu.edu>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: scsi raid geometry high-point rocketraid 1640 Message-ID: <20070430140453.GA17245@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> In-Reply-To: <be36dc210704300054j32e8dd8dpaa2a8972163b4130@mail.gmail.com> References: <be36dc210704291019v4529d449mfd33a0a35f5caa6a@mail.gmail.com> <20070430024158.GB15045@gizmo.acns.msu.edu> <be36dc210704300054j32e8dd8dpaa2a8972163b4130@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Apr 30, 2007 at 09:54:04AM +0200, Klaus Friis Østergaard wrote: > 2007/4/30, Jerry McAllister <jerrymc@msu.edu>: > > > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have a raidcontroller high-point 1640 with 4 disks of 400 GB in a raid > >5 > >> array given me 1200 GB. The bios utility of the controller zero build > >the > >> array with 64 kb > >> > >> FDISK says that the geometry is 145923/255/63 and it is incorrect. Then > >it > >> says that for scsi it is the translation mode the raid controller is > >using. > > > >Usually you want to accept what fdisk does. Just make the slices > >that you want. Geometry is virtual on these systems. > > > >> > >> How do I find this? > >> > >> If I continue with the defaults I only get 1144654 MB like missing 100 > >GB. > > > >Well, I would expect you to get something less than 1,490 GB just from > >the difference between the manufacturer use of GB (1,000,000,000 Bytes) > >and the way the OS uses GB (1,073,741,824 Bytes). > > > That is the missing link, the raid controller says 1200 GB if recalculated, > using 1.073741824 it gives 1,117.59 GB multiplied by 1024 it gives > 1144409 MB which is what FDISK gives default. Wow. Don't tell me I got one (out of how many?). I shall celebrate. ////jerry > > I don't know how much the raidcontroller eats up to manage > >the raid. Raid 5 takes a piece for its redundancy/error > >correction. A raid 5 would eat at least 20% and maybe up to 30% if it > >is rather inefficient. > > > WIth 4 disks it is 25% as 4th disk make the redundancy. > > After that you will lose some because of inconvenient remnants of space > >that doesn't get used. Then, there are amounts for superblocks and other > >aspects of building a filesystem, etc. I think that tends to be around > >10% > >altogether. > > > >So, your number seems somewhat probable, offhand, without detailed > >calculations. > > > >What operations did you do to get to that point? Mine would be an > >fdisk that makes one slice of the entire device, a bsdlabel that > >divides the slice in to about 6 partitions (including swap) and > >a newfs on each partition except swap. > > > I only need the array only for one big slice and one partition for data > storage. > > > Thanks for the help > -- > Klaus F. Østergaard, <farremosen(at)gmail dot com>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070430140453.GA17245>