[plug] raid

[Craig Ringer]

> The software RAID under Linux is not an option as I have to work with both
> Windoz and Linux and boot between the two. 
I've never seen the point. Linux is happy with a bunch of partitions, and I 
have no problem scattering them over 2 or 3 drives - improves performance, in 
fact. Never seen the point of software raid.

> It is very handy being able to
> access the Windoz partitions under Linux. Windoz handles the hardware RAID
> fine but when I boot Linux, no go, it just picks up the individual drives.
> I have sent emails to both the Highpoint and Abit sites and am waiting for
> responses (ha ha).
I think highpoint ATA raid support has been implemented in kernel-2.4.13. 
Download and build that kernel, and see how you go.
Yep, just checked, its there. In "make menuconfig":
	ATA/IDE/MFM/RLL support
		Block Devices
			Support for IDE RAID controllers
				Highpoint 370 software RAID
You may well have to enable "experimental/incomplete driver support" or 
whatever in general options for it to show up, its pretty new and only just 
made it into the mainstream kernel this revision.

And its right to call it "software raid". The only difference between using 
this and linux native software RAID as far as I'm concerned is that this way 
you're using the same system as windows (I think) and can share the same 
virtual volume.

ATA raid, at least on-board, is usually only half in hardware, expecting a 
windoze driver to do a lot of the work. It is _not_ real hardware RAID that 
presents the array as a single virtual drive to the system like proper SCSI 
raid controllers are. It should not be called RAID in my opinion. 

Anybody know why nobody does ATA raid properly? After all, its a Redundant 
Array of _Inexpensive_ Disks and WTF should I have to pay $800 ea for 2 40gig 
SCSI drives which are so reliable and well built you don't really _need_ 
RAID?!? I expect it wouldn't be too hard at all to implement a controller 
that presented a single ATA "virtual disk" like a SCSI raid controller does, 
all in hardware so its os-independent.

Sorry, pet hate. Just had to fork out $3,000 for SCSI raid just to get 40gig 
of redundant storage for the NT (*yich*) box here since current ATA raid 
implementations are unacceptable and software "redunant drives" even worse.