SATA on Linux vs. WinXP WAS Help me to get rid of windows forever

[Guy Fraser]

Robin Laing wrote:

> Bob Gorman wrote:
>
>> At 02:54 PM 4/29/2004, Taylor, ForrestX wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 2004-04-29 at 04:20, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> 1) Is SATA support working now for either chipset on that 
>>>>>> motherboard?
>>>>>> (Intel ICH5/ICH5R Chipset)
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I found a page on Intel's site that said that newer kernels support 
>>>> SATA on the ICH5 chipset, but only in legacy mode:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.intel.com/support/chipsets/sb/cs-006312-prd40.htm
>>>>
>>>> Whereas MSI (the manufacturer of the motherboard I've got on order) 
>>>> states that WinXP can do SATA in Native mode. 
>>>> 1) Is there any advantage to running in Native mode? (IOW, is it 
>>>> worth it to purchase WinXP?)
>>>>
>>>> 2) Does anybody know if Native mode support is coming to linux?
>>>
>>>
>>> Enhanced SATA (not Legacy) already works in Fedora Core and RHL 8,0/9
>>> with newer kernels.  I had to install RHL 8.0 in Legacy mode, then I
>>> could upgrade the kernel and use Enhanced mode.
>>>
>>> I think that the Legacy in BIOS bit was a part of another solution.
>>
>>
>>
>> Enhanced ICH5 is fine in Enhanced Mode with SATA.  It's the RAID 
>> option (ICH5R) that requires Legacy Mode to work.  I just use 
>> software RAID instead. The ICH5R isn't true hardware RAID anyway, 
>> from what I've read.
>>
> Doesn't software raid also have more tools for recovery?  Less 
> hardware dependent?
>
> I set up my new computer with software raid after reading the about 
> the above points.  I took what I read to be true.
>
> BTW, the FC1 kernel did recognize my SATA controller (SI) and the raid 
> that I set up with the BIOS.  I removed the HW raid after reading 
> about recovery and raid tools.

It depends on the hardware.

On Compaq Servers, the SmartRaid Controller has a significant advantage over software raid. If you loose a drive, it will rebuild the new drive 
transparently to the OS. The compaq controllers also have a commandline admin utility. When do a fresh install, you setup the arrays first, then 
install and no additional steps are required.

Most SATA raid controllers are not true hardware raid, most are standard 
SATA controllers with RAID in the BIOS, and it uses the systems cpu to 
do the RAID. 3Ware and a few other vendors make true hardware RAID SATA 
controllers that have their own processor to handle the raid on board, 
but as one would expect they cost more.

We use both hardware and software RAID at work for different projects. I 
have had drive failures on both types and the hardware RAID systems were 
easier to diagnose and fix {Hot Swap}, but both types recovered without 
loss of data. 

In the last 10 years I have had to replace a number of drives on various 
operating system platforms, and running various operating systems. Linux 
and FreeBSD were both about the same and by far the best at recovering 
from partial or complete drive failures. I used a linux machine to make a forensic copy of a hard drive from a Windows XP machine that would not recover from a partial drive failure. I duped the copy to a new drive 
and then Windows XP was able to recover. Goes to show the flexability of 
linux over most other operating systems. I still have the 20GB image of 
the drive from the XP, and have mounted it with a loop device to grab a 
few files, that XP broke while 'repairing' it self.

Good luck.