> > But more importantly, I want controllers that survive total power down.
>
> You can't get that with partition tables either. And by the way, we
WHAT? Partition tables written onto the disk certainly do survive total power
down.
>
> Then give them two logical disks. Just a matter of management.
Again, with an annoying controller, and having the user change their
requirements every so often (like once a day), I do not want to change the
RAID setup lots. The last RAID I was working with took up to an hour to commit
geometry changes to the disk.
> Yes, that's cool in case we'd possibly need one. But in the raid cases we
> should get to a position where partition tables are not just theoretically
> meaningless.
Again, I wouldn't want to depend on that, for the reasons above.
> I've still not said you'd have to do that. You can have a perl script do
> your job scribbling the table together.
Please describe this algorithm? Would this potentially mean looking at every
block on the disk, including the giant logical disk that a RAID might present?
Even if you only have to look at the first few bytes of each block, this is a
lot of seeking.
-- A decision changes the world. http://www.hacksaw.org -- http://www.privatecircus.com -- KB1FVD- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 22:00:19 EST