LSI 320-1 PCI-X RAID 0 "Error Loading Operating System"

[sflsan]

I have an LSI 320-1 PCI-x card with 4 Fujitsu 15k 36GB drives in a RAID 0 configuration. If I offset/align the partition, then I get the message "Error Loading Operating System" after the first reboot when trying to install windows xp64.

If I do a normal install of xp64 withut offsetting the partition, then everything is fine except that it doesn't even run as fast as my onboard SATA RAID 0 with 2 7200 rpm drives.

LSI has been of no help as the tech said he had never heard of offsetting or aligning the partition and after I emailed him all the technical information and a like directly to Microsoft's page on this, he said that it is only for software based RAID and does not pertain to hardware controllers and therefore they cannot provide any more support.

I have done this several times with other "hardware" based RAID setups with no problem and the performance increase is sometimes upwards of 200-300% depending on the setup. This is the first time I have ever received the "Error Loading Operating System" message, and the first time I have used this particular card. Any help would be appreciated, thanks.

 

[technome]

Aligned disks using LSI cards many times, most of the times I get a 10-15% increase in speed for general use servers. Not sure what your doing, but what must be done is the array must be placed in a machine which boots from another bootable OS drive, a partition must be created with the offset on the raid array from the bootable drive, then the array is set as the bootable drive, and the OS installed.

"he said that it is only for software based RAID and does not pertain to hardware controllers"
Pure BS born of ignorance, as the alignment/offset pertains to the OS partition, nothing to do with the raid setup or raid initialization.


........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm

 

[sflsan]

Thanks for the response, I'll give it a try. One thought that I probably should have clarified that I used to use the diskpart to align the partition, but I have started using a vista boot disk to create the partition and then load xp as it is quicker and automatically sets the partition at 2048 which works for the block sizes I use. Is there something that the vista partitioning is doing different than partitioning it from within a running version of windows? I have used the vista boot disk for several RAID setups and have always worked perfectly.

 

[technome]

Vista should align it.
Perhaps the driver added with F6 is a faulty, you might try downloading it again.

http://lsi.com/storage_home/product...araid_scsi_3201/index.html?remote=1&locale=EN

........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm

 

[sflsan]

I've tried again with multiple drivers and none are working with an aligned partition. Like I mentioned before, it is baffling me because if I do not align the partition then xp installs and runs fine.

I appreciate all your help, and I assume since it works without the alignment, there should be some way that will work with the alignment.

 

[sflsan]

Also, for what it's worth I have tried multiple firmwares also and am currently running version 1L49.

 

[technome]

Firmware would not be an issue, the alignment is at the OS (high format)level.

Have you tried fixmbr.......

http://www.microsoft.com/resources/.../proddocs/en-us/bootcons_fixmbr.mspx?mfr=true

or

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/69013

........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm

 

[sflsan]

I finally had some time this weekend when I could have the system down to reload. So far, no luck yet.

I have tried Diskpar, Diskpart, and Vista to create an aligned partition. I have tried multiple settings when using Diskpar and Diskpart with no changes. I have also tried with and without drivers, and with and without SP2.

After each failed attempt, I tried Fixboot, Fixmbr, and then both with no changes. I have also went through several options on the card itself, I have checked the termination and configuration of everything.

If I install Vista, it works fine, and if I do NOT align the partition, XP64 loads fine. But every time I align the partition then XP64 gives me the "Error Loading Operating System" message.

This is starting to drive me insane because "without" the partition aligned it loads, but the throughput on the RAID setup with (4) 15k RPM drives and the card in a 64-bit PCI slot, two dual core opterons with 4GB ram, the throughput is only 87MB. The onboard SATA RAID 0 with only (2) 7200 RPM drives in the same system is running at 145MB throughput (pegging out near the SATA channel's max of 150MB). With 4 15k drives, I should be pegging out the throughput capability of the U320 card, but it's only a third of what it should be.

 

[sflsan]

UPDATE - I downloaded the RC of Windows 7 64 and it installed on the aligned partition without a hitch, except it is still running less than 100MB on the throughput.

Any one have any ideas? I have been researching this for a couple of weeks now and have found several people having similar issues, but none have been solved. The only resolutions appear to be for single drive setups.

 

[technome]

I have an LSI 320-1 PCI-x card"
This card is a few generations back (approx. 2002) with a relatively slow co-processor (66MHz)/electronics/ram cache... roughly 75-120 Meg/sec is about the limit, and that varies with the manufacturer of the drives drive eg. Fujitsu is faster than Seagate. The newest common raid adapter's have co-processors in the range of .5-1.2 GHz.



........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm

 

[sflsan]

Well thanks that does makes me feel a little better. I'm still not sure why xp64 won't install aligned, but maybe it's time to scrap it...

Technome, since you seem to be very knowlagable in the scsi raid field, what would be a good "inexpensive" upgrade, an LSI 2130-R or -IS? or do you think those are too outdated as well? Since they are 133, shouldn't that at least get me over the 100MB hump?

I'm more familiar with SATA cards, but wanted to use the U320 SCSI since I got a good deal on a handful of the 15k drives and the card.

Thanks for all your help!

 

[technome]

The main issue with raid adapters, especially the older generation cards (>4 years old) is the manufacturers concentrated their efforts in optimizing for raid 5 and raid 10, raid 1 and raid 0 were ignored. With the newest adapters somewhat more effort is placed on raid 1 and raid 0 (some Adaptec standard HBA cards, capable of r1 and r0 produced more throughput).
You should get more throughput in raid 0 with the 2132 technically, but I only used the 2132 in raid 1... from memory, the benchmarks were not all that great with 15k drives, basically the same as with high end raid cards such as the LSI u320-2x.





........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm

 

[technome]

Forgot, you may find these benchmarks interesting,in Dutch but benchmarks are in English

http://tweakers.net/benchdb/suite/13

........................................
Chernobyl disaster..a must see pictorial

http://www.kiddofspeed.com/default.htm

 

[sflsan]

That's a good link, very informative. I guess since I'm not going to get any gain from my setup, I might as well run a raid 5 and benefit from a little protection for now until I get a newer card.

Thanks again!