RAID5 on this server??? 2

[goombawaho]

I'm having a disagreement with a new customer. Customer claims he paid for a server with RAID5 from the old IT guy. I have not been able to reboot the server to do a CTRL-I to look at the RAID configuration yet.

But based on the attached picture, is there any chance this server has RAID5? I keep saying to myself - NO!!!!
Looks like one disk for the O.S. and D: drive and another disk for backup only.
It's Windows Small Business Server 2011 Essentials running on an Intel DH87MC motherboard.

"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.

 

[cdogg]

I haven't been in this situation, so I can't say for sure, but I would highly doubt that it will cause problems. There's already a compatible RAID driver being used by the OS, and the installation will only update that. Windows shouldn't choke as a result.

But of course, the safest approach would be to clone the RAID over to a single drive with the same or higher capacity, boot off that clone and install the RST package there as a test before doing it on the real thing.

 

[goombawaho]

But of course, the safest approach would be to clone the RAID over to a single drive with the same or higher capacity, boot off that clone and install the RST package there as a test before doing it on the real thing.

Laughing. Yes, if:
1. I had an extra hard drive or customer does
2. Customer didn't mind billing for experimentation
3. Customer had imaging software

I did check the server registry and it's loading the IASTOR.sys so it SHOULD be fine. Just paranoid.

"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.

 

[technome]

You just want to install the management interface, which does not install a driver. If you choice of interface is not compatible with SBS, Intel is pretty good at stopping incompatible installs. As noted by Cdogg, there already is driver installed; the install of a driver is where possible pain starts, your past that already.


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

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

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
Popular Mechanics, 1949

 

[goombawaho]

I did it. No smoke, no flames. So thanks to everyone.

You get no choice about what components to install and technome:
It does install the GUI but it also updates the driver. Interestingly, it changed the driver. Before, it was loading IASTORV.sys and now it is loading IASTORA.sys and IASTORF.sys

It also changed the name from Intel ICH8R/ICH9R/ICH10R/DO SATA RAID Controller to Intel Desktop/Workstation/Server Express Chipset SATA RAID Controller.



"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.

 

[cdogg]

If that server is critical to the customer, they should be doing nightly backups anyway and not solely relying on RAID 1. Corruption within Windows is just as likely as a failed hard drive, and the RAID array only protects against failing hard drives.

If the customer is already doing that, then this would have been a no-brainer from the start. You've got a backup you could have reverted to if it became hosed. If the customer isn't, well then that would have been enough cause to bill for the so-called "experimentation". Simply note that as the cost of doing business on a server without backups. 500GB drives are dirt cheap these days, and there are a lot of imaging software apps that are free for commercial use (I use Clonezilla).

Good to hear it worked out though.

 

[goombawaho]

If that server is critical to the customer..........

^^^ Yeah, I know all of that. Intel RAID is "only" software RAID really. Not like a fancy Dell PERC or Adaptec controller.

If the customer is already doing that, then this would have been a no-brainer from the start.

Nope. They have online backup - but only for data, not the entire operating system. So it had to be a brainer.
I'm going to try to get them to purchase Macrium Server and do a weekly image backup to external hard drive.

Customer is kind of suspicious of IT people - both billing for too much time & suspicion of incompetence, so I didn't want to frog anything up or bill too much to start off.

"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.

 

[cdogg]

Customer is kind of suspicious of IT people - both billing for too much time & suspicion of incompetence, so I didn't want to frog anything up or bill too much to start off.

Fair enough. I usually lay out both scenarios. Here's one with a little risk (cheaper), and here's one with practically no risk (more expensive). If they're comfortable with the risk of going with the cheaper option, then that takes me off the hook. I think giving them options is the way to reassure them that you're not trying to work unnecessary costs into the bill.

 

[goombawaho]

Just found out yesterday that the backup was backing up the OLD database location since 2014. The new database was not being backed up. Working after someone else always seems to reveal a bunch of landmines.

"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.

 

[edfair]

I hope that discovery and solution helps the customer relations issues a bit.

Ed Fair
Give the wrong symptoms, get the wrong solutions.

 

[technome]

I did it. No smoke, no flames."
Your missing some fun, was at a client during lightning, was at door of server room when a bolt came through roof, direct hit on server... definite smoke and flames.

With a raid 1, if you remove one of the members, it becomes an emergency backup. With some clients, (mainly Active Directory) I rotate disks every 6 months. Not a current backup, but at least it gets you boot-able in a hurry.


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

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

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
Popular Mechanics, 1949

 

[goombawaho]

The new worry with LARGE disks is that the original disk fails during RAID rebuild after replacing a drive!!! Fun times.

"Living tomorrow is everyone's sorrow.
Modern man's daydreams have turned into nightmares.

 

[technome]

The new worry with LARGE disks is that the original disk fails during RAID rebuild after replacing a drive!!! Fun times."

Yes original raid design (70s,80s)did not account for present disk sizes. Was on the Dell forum, someone wanted to create a 12 disk parity array with 6Tb drives on LSI based controller... basically you need to be on drugs to do this, as it will not last.


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

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

"Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons."
Popular Mechanics, 1949