Quote:
|
Originally Posted by VON_CAPO
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SUBMAN1
the partition table is spread across opposite drives in a different format. The reason being is that the ULIRaid writes things in a different sector format than the SiLRAID, so even if I could recover my partitions, the new RAID controller will still not be able to read the data on the new controller. On top of that, the split happened at 16k chunks before and I am now using 64k chunks to deal better with larger file sizes at the expense of smaller file transfer speeds, so data is even allocated differently between the drives than they were in the past.
|
That is a huge mess!!! 
My machine in the begining was configurated with a array composed by 2 hard drives in mode "striped", and like you I've got a lot of troubles.
My solution was to configurate 2 separated arrays composed each one with only one hard drive, and they work perfectly.
By the way, if you have plans to create a NTFS partition, make it with the Windows XP's default chunk size (4K), to avoid problems with Linux installers.  |
No - it is not WIndows XP chunk size - it is the arrays chunk size. ie. - One drive takes 64k, before the alternate drive gets the next 64k size, before swapping back to the first drive - back forth back forth - it's RAID 0. 16k chunks works better for many smaller file types, but what I use RAID for in the first place is for large files (Up to 150 GB files) so a larger chunk size works more efficiently for this at the expense of some performance for smaller files.