From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 6 07:30:14 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5D0B16A41C for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 07:30:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ade@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.lovett.com (foo.lovett.com [67.134.38.158]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AFFB43D48 for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2005 07:30:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ade@FreeBSD.org) Received: from hellfire.lovett.com ([67.134.38.149]:51387) by mail.lovett.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.51 (FreeBSD)) id 1Dq4MH-00037b-W9; Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:30:14 -0700 Message-ID: <42CB8864.3010209@FreeBSD.org> Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 00:29:40 -0700 From: Ade Lovett User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Niki Denev References: <42B5ED53.3010805@hosting50.cz> <42C8F90D.3050505@cytexbg.com> In-Reply-To: <42C8F90D.3050505@cytexbg.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: ade@lovett.com Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SCSI troubles X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2005 07:30:14 -0000 Niki Denev wrote: > From what i understand this is not exactly a FreeBSD problem, but rather > a consequence of U320 being really hard on the hardware with pushing it > to the limits. Incorrect. The relevant parts of the output you pasted are: ahd Seagate drives Attaching more than one Seagate drive to a single Adaptec chain will result in various weird and wonderful behavior as you've described. This is above and beyond well known (and documented) issues with data loss and corruption with certain firmware revisions on Seagate drives. You have essentially two options: (1) disable the (on-board) adaptec controller, and use something else (LSI cards work pretty good) (2) chunk the Seagate drives, and replace them with some other vendor (Hitachi, for example, in our high-stress environments, show equivalent MTBFs) I've spent several years (no, I'm not kidding) going around the loop between Adaptec, Seagate, and various motherboard manufacturers, trying to get sensible U320 performance out of the hardware. Each vendor blames the other. Now, I'm a tenacious person by nature (guess it's part of being English), and I have no intention of letting this just go until I hear some real, valid, reasons as to the interoperability issues (are you listening Seagate?) However, in the meantime, if you don't want to cripple those expensive U320 drives by dropping the controller to U160 for each and every device, I strongly recommend either option (1) or (2) above, and move on. -aDe