Huh?
Never heard of that issue. I did buy a 2.5TB drive which included a (no extra cost) add-on SATA controller, but I assumed that was simply so that it (1) would support the full 6gbit/sec speed of the drive, and (2) had an onboard BIOS that could boot from a drive larger than the "2TB boot limit".
IIRC, Western Digital supplied that add-on card with the first version of their drive, which was 3gbit/s. The 6gbit/s version which was released a couple of months later didn't have that card shipped with it anymore.
The issue was that Windows or Intel didn't release drivers for their southbridge chipset to be able to support drives larger than 2.2 TB. Article with info on this issue
here.
My MythTV box with the 3TB drives is based on ICH8.
I guess this answers my question that Linux has no problem with this! Great! (with Windows, it didn't even work with an ICH10)
unRAID sounds exactly like what most of us probably would want to use in a home RAID setup. Much, much better than legacy RAID configurations for home use with single-drive redundancy.
Still requires a full separate back-up, though.
Agreed on both counts. It seems pretty ideal to me. It's solid because it's based on Linux, all data is shown in one big storage pool which is expandable without much effort, disks of different sizes can be used and it's redundant if one disk drops out. All the benefits of RAID5 (well, not the extra speed, but so be it), but none of the downsides.
Previous Topic
Index
