On Wednesday 29 June 2005 23:59, Mark Miksis wrote: > Peter Arremann wrote: > > Actually, I have some 9500s that are finally getting stable. Each new > > driver revision and each new firmware is better than the last and by > > now, I have no issues (also running the x86_64 but on amd hardware). > > Thanks for the encouraging feedback. It appears that the driver in FC4 > is a bit old (and doesn't seem to correspond to a 3Ware release). Are > you running SMP? Both - running an Athlon64, 32bit PCI slot, 2 mirrored drives and a quad opteron, pci-x, 4 raid 0 drives. > > Anyone who asks me, usually gets a 8500 controller as recommendation > > because unlike the 9500s, those are actually rock solid. You should > > try the firmware updates and maybe the driver (if there is one newer > > than the one in the kernel you're running) and see if you can't get > > your box stable that way - as I said before, it worked for me. > > I plan to compile the latest driver tomorrow... The driver in the FC4 kernel is 2.26.02.002 (grep -i version /lib/modules/2.6.11-1.1369_FC4/kernel/drivers/scsi/3w-9xxx.ko) while the driver that amcc has is 2.26.03.015fw (grep TW_DRIVER_VERSION 3w-9xxx.c) Its not that great a difference but it might be worth it for you. Don't forget to check the firmware upgrades as well. > > Also, you might want to get an AMD system next time if you have heavy > > IO and more than 4GB ram - the AMD iommu requires no bounce > > buffers... > > Interesting. Actually, my IO needs are not *that* heavy, but I first > encountered the problem when trying to restore a bunch of backups from > my previous machine. High is relative... Sometimes a simple script can create a ton of IO for just a few seconds and that can be enough. :-) Peter.
