<div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 2:24 PM, Kevin Ross <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:kevin@familyross.net">kevin@familyross.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="im">On 12/07/2010 12:01 PM, jmk wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
On Tue, 2010-12-07 at 11:31 -0800, Kevin Ross wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
FWIW, I have 2 WD10EARS drives, along with 3 WD10EADS drives, in a RAID5<br>
array. I needed to fiddle with fdisk to get the partitions started on a<br>
4K boundary. By default, fdisk wants to start a partition at sector 63,<br>
which is obviously not on a 4K boundary, and would cause performance<br>
degradation if left like that.<br>
<br>
I haven't had any problems with the WD drives in my array. Also, these<br>
drives have been fast enough for MythTV. I sometimes record up to 4 HD<br>
shows at once, while watching from a frontend, while commflagging, and<br>
haven't had problems with the drives not being able to keep up. I do,<br>
however, keep my MySQL database on a separate drive.<br>
</blockquote>
Cool.<br>
<br>
Did you find you need any specific versions of utils or kernel to make<br>
things happy with that setup? I'm replacing a Gentoo-based backend, but<br>
will probably just throw Ubuntu 10.04 or 10.10 on there. I guess I'd<br>
make sure I use the latest gdisk to partition it, but I'm hoping<br>
everything else would just install fine as is.<br>
<br>
Joe<br>
</blockquote>
<br></div>
No, running Debian Squeeze, kernel 2.6.32, mdadm version 3.1.4.<br>
<br>
Note that my main OS drive isn't on a RAID, just a single disk. I'm not booting from RAID.<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
<br>
<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br>Note that Green drives are not recommended for raid arrays because of timing out and goofing your raid array. WD's "RE" (RAID Edition) HDDs support Time-Limited Error Recovery ("TLER" ):
<br>
<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.wdc.com/en/products/productcatalog.asp?language=en" target="_blank" class="cLink"></a><br>More info here:<br><br><a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/251076-32-raid-issues-western-digital-hard-disk">http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/251076-32-raid-issues-western-digital-hard-disk</a><br>
<br>I went WD Black RE's and they are speedy and have been reliable.<br><br>Andrew<br>
<br></div></div>