Prev: Installing XP Pro Like OEM Factory
Next: install xp with other licenses
From: none on 28 Sep 2009 18:17
I have a Gigabyte MA785GPMT-UD2H motherboard with the AMD SB710
Southbridge that includes a Promise SATA controller. I have it set up as
SATA RAID 1 with two drives. I was able to install XP64 onto this fine
but when I reboot, XP sees that both drives have the same signature and
gives one of them a new signature. This breaks the mirror and XP assigns
a new drive letter to it. At this point, one disk is still part of a
RAID1 set and the other disk is in "Single Drive" mode (as the RAID
controller calls it).

This makes it seem that somehow XP is looking at the drives themselves
as opposed to going through the RAID controller and seeing a single
volume.

Does anybody know why this is happening and how it can be fixed? Is this

Thanks a lot for any help.

Steve

P.S. I've posted emails to Gigabyte and AMD forums with no replies yet.
From: Shenan Stanley on 28 Sep 2009 21:04
none wrote:
> I have a Gigabyte MA785GPMT-UD2H motherboard with the AMD SB710
> Southbridge that includes a Promise SATA controller. I have it set
> up as SATA RAID 1 with two drives. I was able to install XP64 onto
> this fine but when I reboot, XP sees that both drives have the same
> signature and gives one of them a new signature. This breaks the
> mirror and XP assigns a new drive letter to it. At this point, one
> disk is still part of a RAID1 set and the other disk is in "Single
> Drive" mode (as the RAID controller calls it).
>
> This makes it seem that somehow XP is looking at the drives
> themselves as opposed to going through the RAID controller and
> seeing a single volume.
>
> Does anybody know why this is happening and how it can be fixed? Is
> this
> Thanks a lot for any help.
>
> Steve
>
> P.S. I've posted emails to Gigabyte and AMD forums with no replies
> yet.

Not an answer to your question, but a comment/question to make you re-think
what you are doing. Yeah - not asked for, but - you never know what you
might learn unexpectantly and if you don't want the advice - don't read it.
;-)

What are you hoping to get out of RAID1?

Raid Level 1 is mirroring. The only think RAID 1 gives you is the ability
to use the other drive in case the first drive fails catastrophically and
instantly. If it starts developing bad sectors, data gets corrupted, etc -
the corruption *will be* mirrored over (not the physical bad sectors, of
course - but the results of those bad sectors.

For most home users - those not editing/creating/etc large files (2GB+
single files IMO) - I suggest just having multiple drives. C & D. With an
external medium (external hard drive, CD, DVD, network share, etc) to backup
to.

For those users who might be editing/creating/etc large files (2GB+ single
files IMO) with the RAID capability - maybe a RAID 0 - striping. Large C or
partitioned into good sized C, large D or whatever you really want. Still
with an external medium (external hard drive, CD, DVD, network share, etc)
to backup to.

For those with the capability and money to burn and wanting a little extra
performance with a little peace of mind built -in - maybe a RAID 5 (3+
drives). Large C or partitioned into good sized C, large D or whatever you
really want. Still with an external medium (external hard drive, CD, DVD,
network share, etc) to backup to.

Hard drives usually have death rattles before they die - so I have
historically found RAID 1 to be pretty much worthless - particularly for
home users. It's a waste of good and valuable space, IMHO.

As to your direct problem - sounds like the driver (inside Windows XP
Professional x64) you are using is defective or the hardware RAID controller
is.

--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html


From: Paul on 28 Sep 2009 22:05
none wrote:
> I have a Gigabyte MA785GPMT-UD2H motherboard with the AMD SB710
> Southbridge that includes a Promise SATA controller. I have it set up as
> SATA RAID 1 with two drives. I was able to install XP64 onto this fine
> but when I reboot, XP sees that both drives have the same signature and
> gives one of them a new signature. This breaks the mirror and XP assigns
> a new drive letter to it. At this point, one disk is still part of a
> RAID1 set and the other disk is in "Single Drive" mode (as the RAID
> controller calls it).
>
> This makes it seem that somehow XP is looking at the drives themselves
> as opposed to going through the RAID controller and seeing a single volume.
>
> Does anybody know why this is happening and how it can be fixed? Is this
>
> Thanks a lot for any help.
>
> Steve
>
> P.S. I've posted emails to Gigabyte and AMD forums with no replies yet.

Are you *sure* a RAID driver is running ?

I'd start by checking Device Manager, and seeing what driver
files are listed for the controller. Then, go find the floppy
you used to F6 install the drivers during the install (assuming
you're booting from the RAID 1), and see what files are on that floppy.

I tested my older Promise controller a couple weeks ago,
and the metadata is up near the end of the disk. The software
leaves some space, so you can't create a partition on top of
the 2KB thing. The metadata records what array the disk belongs
to. In the case of a stripe, it records which disk is odd
and which one is even (for the stripes). If you don't set up
an array, the area remains zeroed.

+------------+------------+--------------+----------------+
| User space | ~5MB space | 2KB metadata | a few more KBs |
+------------+------------+--------------+----------------+

To get your symptoms, you'd need to

1) Erase the 2KB block to all zeros on one of the disks.
That makes one disk into a "single".
2) The driver would need the capability of supporting both "single"
and RAID arrays at the same time. Then, if (1) happens, two
identical volumes would end up in Windows (requiring the
disk signature to be corrected). I think once you see the
request to correct the signature, the array is already broken.
(The metadata should record that fact, and force a rebuild on you.)
I'm surprised the machine didn't flash a warning in the BIOS.

On my machine, the warning stays on the screen for like, 3 seconds,
and then the stupid computer continues booting. Which is not
the way I'd design it, if I had a choice. I'd want the stupid
machine to stop, if the array is damaged. I didn't even have
time to read the paragraph of text they put on the screen.

Testing RAID hardware is all part of using it. I got a few
surprises, while using the interface. I tried a number of
test cases, just to see what would happen (i.e. screwing
with the metadata). That is part of the expense of using it.
You need to know what to expect, and what symptoms will occur,
if a disk dies on you. A 3 second error message in the BIOS,
is not much to go on. It is a good thing I was staring
intently at the screen at the time.

Paul
From: Andrew E. on 28 Sep 2009 22:22
Are you sure you have/had a RAID set..A RAID enabled set will always
show in the RAID pre-OS boot,its also where a RAID set is created.At every
pc start,does the utility show up,& are both hd present.If not,you are not
running RAID.Also,in the BIOS one needs to set the MB for RAID/SATA,then
one needs to set it to work with IDE drives,if you use hd or cdrom/rw.

"none" <""cousins"@(none)" wrote:

> I have a Gigabyte MA785GPMT-UD2H motherboard with the AMD SB710
> Southbridge that includes a Promise SATA controller. I have it set up as
> SATA RAID 1 with two drives. I was able to install XP64 onto this fine
> but when I reboot, XP sees that both drives have the same signature and
> gives one of them a new signature. This breaks the mirror and XP assigns
> a new drive letter to it. At this point, one disk is still part of a
> RAID1 set and the other disk is in "Single Drive" mode (as the RAID
> controller calls it).
>
> This makes it seem that somehow XP is looking at the drives themselves
> as opposed to going through the RAID controller and seeing a single
> volume.
>
> Does anybody know why this is happening and how it can be fixed? Is this
>
> Thanks a lot for any help.
>
> Steve
>
> P.S. I've posted emails to Gigabyte and AMD forums with no replies yet.
>
From: Steve Cousins on 28 Sep 2009 23:03

"Andrew E." <eckrichco(a)msn.com> wrote in message
news:957C7EB6-95C6-4EAF-9FBA-BB44C524054A(a)microsoft.com...
> Are you sure you have/had a RAID set..A RAID enabled set will always
> show in the RAID pre-OS boot,its also where a RAID set is created.At every
> pc start,does the utility show up,& are both hd present.If not,you are not
> running RAID.Also,in the BIOS one needs to set the MB for RAID/SATA,then
> one needs to set it to work with IDE drives,if you use hd or cdrom/rw.

Hi,

Yes, I have it set up in the BIOS and it shows up in the RAID BIOS as well
as the RAIDXpert software (from AMD) that runs from a web browser in XP. XP
is running from the mirror, albeit a broken mirror. Like I said in the first
message, one drive is still a member of the RAID 1 set and the other is now
a Single Drive.

As for why mirror, it is to avoid issues of catastrophic hard-drive failure.

The thing I don't understand is why XP even sees the individual drives. My
only guess is that it is getting to them before the RAID driver is loaded.
If so, I wonder if there is a way to change the order of that.

Thanks,

Steve

> "none" <""cousins"@(none)" wrote:
>
>> I have a Gigabyte MA785GPMT-UD2H motherboard with the AMD SB710
>> Southbridge that includes a Promise SATA controller. I have it set up as
>> SATA RAID 1 with two drives. I was able to install XP64 onto this fine
>> but when I reboot, XP sees that both drives have the same signature and
>> gives one of them a new signature. This breaks the mirror and XP assigns
>> a new drive letter to it. At this point, one disk is still part of a
>> RAID1 set and the other disk is in "Single Drive" mode (as the RAID
>> controller calls it).
>>
>> This makes it seem that somehow XP is looking at the drives themselves
>> as opposed to going through the RAID controller and seeing a single
>> volume.
>>
>> Does anybody know why this is happening and how it can be fixed? Is this
>>
>> Thanks a lot for any help.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> P.S. I've posted emails to Gigabyte and AMD forums with no replies yet.
>>


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Installing XP Pro Like OEM Factory
Next: install xp with other licenses