K9A2 Plat- OS won't stripe across disk in raid 0

[RTK]

  I am trying to do a simple setup as hardware Raid 0 to get the best performance out of my existing system but continue running into problems.


K9A2 Platinum/ Vista 64 Ultimate ( currently using new Beta bios because of memory 8gb memory issues)
Apevia case with gauges, 1- 120mm and 3-80mm fans
1- WD 10k raptor
2-15k Fujitsu MAX3147RC
2-2GB GSkill pc8500 1066mhz
AMD Phenom 9600BE
ATI FireGL 5600
1- DVD/CD with litescribe
1- floppy drive
1- multi card reader
OCZ 700watt ps


I have been experimenting with raid setups on the K9A2 Platinum and I am not able to get Vista to stripe across the raid disk like it is supposed to.

One setup was using the Fujitsu drives on the Promise 5 & 6. Both disk were setup on LD1, Raid 0 stripe. Under Disk Management this shows up as one disk(C Drive), but the OS or any other info only goes on one disk and does not stripe across both disk because the second disk is only an extension of the first. Anything installed on the C Drive goes to the first disk and nothing will go on the second disk(at least until the first disk is full). Because both disk are the C Drive(one extending or spanning to the other) software striping is not an option.

The second experiment using the Fujitsu drives on the Promise 5 & 6. This time I set the disks up on LD1 and LD2 Raid 0 stripe. During the install Vista only lets you select one of the drives to install the OS on. Under Disk Management this shows up as 2 different disk, but Vista is not striped across both disk. Why isn't Vista striped across both harddrives? You can however use any unallocated space on these drives to do a software stripe with Vista Ultimate. This seems to only be good for storage.

The last time I check hardware raid 0 meant striping info across disk for faster performance. This motherbaord doesn't stripe across the disk at all using the Promise Raid. Is this a driver issue a bios issue, or am I missing something altogether.

[newton77]

Hi'ya,

that sounds really weird, but this board can do some weird stuff!! ,,. i've use the promise controller with 2 and 4 x raptors in striped array, striping as they should in XP-32bit,... so i'm guessing you've got extra raid device enabled, sb600 raid disabled, boot other raid device enabled, and in the raid bios, i think your right to just set up the drives as 1 LD striped array, then i guess your going back to the bios and changing the boot order to 1,cd then 2,your new array, sticking the cd in restarting, then do you have an option to specify other drivers F6 (not sure if you do in vista64), and/or does the installer formatter see the array or different drives, and can you (or do you have to) install the promise drivers in vista to setup the rest of the drive as striped array, if so i guessing vista doesn't have the promise driver as standard and you can specify?,  if this is all true you'll need to add the driver to the install dvd, i think there are some walk throughs on the net on how to do this,..

also the controller is still a software one, the chip does the linking and controlling and passes off the processing to the cpu (which doesn't really matter as quad cores have enough going spare)


let us know if this sounds like what could be happening.. or add any other tests your doing.

cheers..

[RTK]

Thanks for the response Newton. I finally got a call from an MSI tech and went over the setup with him over the phone. Both 15k drives setup on LD1 RAID 0 array using SAS 5-6 connections, using the max space on each drive. Did a new install using Vista 64 Ultimate( drives were C drive partition 1 and 2). The RAID would not stripe like it should have, so he told me to RMA the MB. I sent the board back for 2 problems. #One-SAS Promise RAID setup and #Two-8gb 1066 memory not working. They sent the board back and said it tested OK.

I installed the MB again and still had the same problems. I have since learned that even though MSI advertises 8gb of 1066 on an AM2+ board it isn't true because of the AMD processor.

http://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=117836.0

As far as the RAID setup with the Promise T3 using the SAS drives, MSI is trying to tell me that the SAS drives can't be setup in RAID.

I am considering getting a RAID controller, Adeaptec 2405, but I am worried that these won't stripe either.

http://www.adaptec.com/en-us/_common/series2/?hpBan=swf-series2-US

[newton77]

Hi, that sounds like a load of rubbish to me, SAS drives can't be put in RAID thats what there for, servers, and servers run arrays!, support told me my K9A2-p doesn't have LEDs on it, funny!.. that is alot of ram to run at 1066mhz, they would all have to be double sided DIMMs and thats beyond the mem-controller, naughty that their not clearer about the boards abilities.

you could (and probably should) get a RAID card if you want to run high performance arrays, although i still don't know how the drives are being split by the OS if the controller is doing it's job right,. have you tried an XP install though with right drivers?, and how about those VISTA64 raid drivers are you getting them installed ok?, going back over the problem, the array should show up as one drive (something like Disk0) in the OS are you seeing both them?(Disk0 and Disk1) or are you seeing Disk0 with your partition-1 C: and partition-2 (not C:):  this would be normal.

[Brokennose]

I would think much of this would have to do with the Bios version your using.

I am not using SAS drives currently, so I cannot comment on the T3 chip.

I can say though that using Bios 1.4 (the only version I know of that officially supports phenom) I could not get my memory to run at 1066MHz.
Using 1.3 though I am able to do everything with no problems at all.

[newton77]

thats very interesting, this forum always puts failing ram setups on the cpu (because of the integrated memory controller*),  but from my experience and knowledge it's not always that way, and it seems nor yours,.. *but although the memory controller is in the cpu, the motherboard(bios) configures both RAM and memory controller at POST.

..

[Bas]

He uses 4 sticks of memory, that's not supposed to run at 1066 at all, one can be lucky.
Sometimes a bios revision helps a little.
In general 4 sticks simply isn't designed to do full speed.
Please read the AMD techdocs, it's all in there.

[newton77]

bas, if something can't do something, no amount of "luck" will change it, the controller must be able to or it just wouldn't, ever. as always it's just a lack of data to understand what the controller needs to run 4x1gb at 1066mhz, as i've said my rig is running 4x1gb @ 1066mhz so the controller can run 4 dimms at 1066mhz.

but i actually missread Brokennose's post, so my post to that is weird, but the point still stands.

and yep have read them thanks.. 

[Bas]

Newton, sorry but digital is a bit strange on that part.
You need normally a solid block-wave to differ between a logical 0 and 1.
Funny is that electronic components have a hard time to keep it a solid block-wave, so the faster you switch the more it becomes a different wave-form or simply doesn't meet the requirements for a logical 0 or 1 anymore, that's where crashes start.
So as long as you are able to meet the required levels for 0 and 1 it will work, but manufacturers want to make sure it works all the time in any quantity so they design something to do something.
Sure you can go outside specs (Overclocking) but that goes well as long as you meet the 0 / 1 levels and that's far from sure the same at every port.
Ergo, it can work for you but fail for another as the level to make a 1 = normally a positive voltage for a minimum amount of time and a 0 is 0v for a minimal amount of time too.
But when going out of specs you can e.g. reach just 1/2 the voltage, so it gets into trouble knowing this is 1 or 0 that it reads...because the time is too short to determine it properly.
One component can read such properly as 1 where the other doesn't and fails.
I hope it's a bit clear now that out of specs anything is possible and yes you have to have a whole bunch of luck.

That's why a lot of starting OC people get upset it doesn't work for them but does for others....it's because of the signal levels, time and wave-form...upping the voltage helps a little but it's not a miracle thing because if your signal is disturbed too much (happens with OC a lot), no voltage upping will correct that.

[Hans]

Seems to me that you guys are drifting off a bit .... let's go back to the RAID isue here.

@RTK - Looks like Vista doesn't support the T3 chip natively. If a RAID-chip isn't supported, the OS will "look" right through it and your RAID-setup is ignored. That is what's happening to you.  Did you try loading the newest driver for the Promise RAID controller druing setup? If you didn't , please retry using a seperate driver during installation. Drivers are right >> here <<.

[RTK]

Thanks for responding. I am currently waiting for a response from MSI on what type and brand of memory they used. I have tried all the BIOS 1.2 thru 1.5 and beta bios 1.54. I am using GSKILL 2gb dual channel sticks 1066. I have also tried different voltages 1.8 - 2.3 as recommended by MSI even though the board is not supposed to go over 2.1v

 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231166

Newton, I have tried both setups in raid and with different bios. I have no problems installing the promise drivers from a usb drive as well as all the other drivers. I have not tried XP yet. I went over the setup with an MSI tech and yes the correct way is Disk 0, partition 1 and partition 2. When the setup didn't work, I was told to RMA the MB. The MB was sent back and here is their response.


MSI Tech. 07/15/2008 Dear Customer, The board was fully tested from the RMA report that was generated. We can then go ahead and issue a 2nd RMA have the board replaced this time no matter what fully tested and sent back to you. If that is okay please reply back and we can go ahead and start the RMA. Thank you,

MSI Tech. 07/16/2008 Dear Customer, I dont beleive the board supports SAS raid at all we can try to verify but again it may not. it does in fact support up to 8gb of memory that should not be a problem. Thank you,

I should hear back from them later today.

[newton77]

you missing the bigger picture Bas, and over and over giving me no knowledge on my side, so i don't think there's much point in talking to you.


sorry, your right Hans...

hope it goes well RTK, but i don't think your going to get 4 double sided DIMM's working at 1066mhz,.... so if your seeing Disk 0 and the OS is installing on partition 1 how are you seeing it's not striping?

..

[Bas]

Thing is, have you loaded the drivers?
Is the Stripe created in the Promise BIOS?

If both are done, then Vista should see 1 big drive and not separate drives.

[RTK]

Yes, the Promise drivers are loaded during the Vista install (Unless I missed one, but I don't think I did) and the array is setup during the Promise Fastrack with both 15k drives on LD1. Vista sees one big drive (disk 0, partition 1 and partion 2). In disk manager partition 2 (being the 2nd 15k drive) has nothing on it. It is all free disk space. That tells me it isn't striping across the disks.

I think the max amount of 1066 memory I will be able to put on this board is 6gb( 2 double sided and 2 single sided). The most memory I have seen my system use so far was 1.8gb.

I just recieved a pre-sales response from Adaptec on the 2405 and they say that controller will be able to handle the SAS drives with Vista 64 in
RAID 0 and it will be much faster then the onboard Promise RAID. I would have to purchase new cables for the SAS drives.

[newton77]

you didn't happen to make two partitions the same size did you (the size of a drive, 136.9GB), and think that one pratition is one drive and one is the other?, it's not, it sounds like it is a striping array to me, as it's seeing both drives as Disk 0 and has partitions on that,.


just thought, if you benchmark it it'll give you an idea if the drives are running striped...

[RTK]

I used the full size of both disks during the setup.

Disk Manager reads:

Disk 0 , 273.89gb - Volume C 136.81gb(system, boot, primary partion, active, etc.) , Volume D 136.98gb(primary partition)

They are listed as 2 volumes under Disk Mngmt and My Computer.

My Computer lists:

Local disk C 109gb free of 136.82gb

Volume D 136gb free of 136gb
Nothing is striping across the 2 volumes or drives.


Which benchmark test should I use?

[newton77]

yeah, what the RAID controllers done is joined the two drives (136GB) so they have become one 273GB drive then (whats done you head in) you've split them back into two partitions of 136GB so in your head that must be the two drives, but most importantly each partition (of the same size as one single drive) is striped across both drives, you could have made a 73GB C: and a 200GB or 2x 100GB partitions after that….. (and probably not fried your head)

 something for a quick no fuss test "HD-tach" would do to see (although not seen as good, it's good enough to see if you getting a big average read) atto is also good but there are a selection of sizes that really effect the result (although the largest "total length" will give you a good idea of the raw speed)

[Hans]

Something like that must have happened. Try to setup Windows again. When you load the Promise driver, make sure it's a RAID-driver, not only the SAS/SATA-driver (I think Promise needs only one, so you did this right the first time). Now, when you see the two partitions, delete them both. If you still see two disks now, then there's something wrong. If you only see one disk (twice a single-disk size), then you can make one partition (or more, if you like) and it should be striping.

Another thing: can you find the T3 in Device Manager? What does it say in Properties?

[Bas]

Windows can't see what raid it's doing, as for Windows it's just a single drive (no matter what Raid you use).
A Volume or Partition is a virtual drive, it's never the harddisk itself.
The harddisk itself isn't shown in Windows, only the partitions.
However, in the device driver manager you should be able to see how many "harddisks" Windows thinks it's using, so for RAID that would be only 1 harddisk, namely the RAID-array.
If it's not an array it would show more "harddisks" in the device driver manager.

[Fredrik]

Yes, that sounds like a plausible situation: New partitions created on the full RAID. Fear I don't know the RAID tools of this particular motherboard, but you should see the full RAID somewhere in BIOS. It used to be F10 you hit during boot-up, but things change so very quickly these days. 

A bit off: Can't recommend having other disks in when setting up RAID.

[RTK]

I did have the WD HD in during the install.

HD TACH says it needs win2000 or XP to work.
The Bios boot sequence is RAID:42819 ARY 1.

I will try another install and see if it will let me extend the partition from one disk to the other with the WD HD removed.

[newton77]

i don't think that would have caused a problem, 1, as you haven't got a problem, and 2, the os will just install on the drive/partition it's told to.

ah, yeah forgot about vista for HD tach, you could just hit google for vista harddrive benchmarks i'm sure you'll find something, maybe "HD-tune".

you need to make the main C: partition at OS install the rest you can do in the OS after install. but at the minute you are running two partitions on a striped array so if your happy with the sizes  of them there's no point redoing anything.

[Hans]

I Recommend to make one big partition, just to avoid any confusion between disks/partitions, etc. One is one and you will be sure that the striping array works fine after installing on an array with only one partition. Luckily, in Vista it is possible to resize an existing partition, so you don't need to install any software to do that. Just make one big partition, install Vista on it and resize the partition  to free up some disk space for any additional partition you want.

In my opinion, it is not possible that Vista is ignoring the RAID setting, unless the RAID chip isn't supported by the operating system, which I doubt. (Check device manager -> SCSI/RAID-controllers to see what driver is installed to verify that Vista is using a RAID driver).

[RTK]

Device manager had the Promise raid drivers and Promise RAID console and one other driver.  I already tried a new install with the WD HD removed. The windows install bar would go across the screen and hang there. I had to setup to use optimized defaults in the bios in order for windows to continue. This time both SAS drives showed up as one drive(Disk1 partition1-273gb) unlike all the other times before. This is using BIOS 1.5. I loaded the Promise PDC42819 Fastrack drivers with no problem and the disk then showed it as Primary. When I clicked the next button, Message reads:

Windows cannot determine if this system has a valid system volume.

I tried a few more times deleting and or formating the Disk1/part1 but still get the same message.

[Hans]

You say that Vista showed it as one disk and that you then installed the driver. Why not try it without? If Vista already recognizes the striping array correctly, then it is supported natively and you don't need a newer driver.

[RTK]

I started from scratch again since I had nothing to loose. I did not have the WD HD connected.  Bios version 1.5

1) I only had the 2 SAS 15k HD connected to Connectors 5-6.

2) I used the Fastrack Build Utility and set up both disk on LD1 using the Max capacity of both drives.

3) I set up the BIOS up to use optimised defaults, but changed the boot order to 1) CD/DVD rom      2) PDC42819 ARY 1      3) PDC42819 ARY 1
    memory speed was set to Auto (800) not 1066.

4) I was then able to boot from the Vista DVD.

5) No Disks showed up so I had to load the drivers(Promise 42819 RAID controller). I then clicked next and the both disks showed up as disk C             unallocated 293gb. I then clicked load drivers again and another

[RTK]

   I did a new install from scratch again. I only used the 2 SAS HD connected to 5-6. I did not have the WD HD connected at all. I set the bios up to use the optimised defaults, with the memory speed set to 800 instead of 1066 and the voltage set at 2v.

I set the boot order to: 1) CD/DVD     2) PDC42819 ARY 1      3) PDC42819 ARY 1

1)    I used the Fast Build Utility and put both drives on LD1 RAID 0, and used the max capacity of both drives.

2)    I booted from the Vista DVD. When it got to the load drivers window no disks were shown. I clicked load drivers and browse and loaded them from
       a USB drive. The drivers showed up as Promise PDC42819 RAID Controller. I highlighted the drivers and clicked next, and bothe disks showed up
       as one C drive of 293gb unallocated space. I then clicked load drivers again. Another set of drivers -Promise Raid Controller, showed up. I
       highlighted those drivers and clicked the next button. I then clicked new and accepted the default max size, which then listed the drive as Primary
      I then clicked continue, and Vista continued the install.

I did not click delete or format.


Disk Manager shows one disk C with 293gb and only one volume or partition.

My computer shows only disks C with about 265gb of 293gb free.

Both disks are as one now and should be striping. I am downloading updates and other drivers now and will be benchmark testing soon.

 Hats off to everyone who helped, and thanks.

[newton77]

good stuff.. 

[Henry]

 Just remember, don't store anything on RAID 0 that you want to keep. Use only for work and then tranfer data to non-striped HDD or burn to optical disc for storage.

[newton77]

even a single drive can fail, you should always back up.

..

[Hans]

So, you needed two drivers after all .... like the nForce RAID does... good that you found that one out.
And yes, keep on backing up! with two physical drives, the chances of drive failure and not being able to boot up has doubled.

[RTK]

 I tried to use Vista snipping tool to cut and paste the benchmark of HD Tune but it wouldn't work. Here is a different sit I used that shows comparisons. Mine is listed as #2. I guess it is OK. I'm not sure if I would be able to improve upon this to much without a controller card.


http://datamarck.com/benchmarks/2903#device-1412


HD Tune Transfer Rate

Minimum - 110mb/s

Maximum - 157mb/s

Average - 147mb/s

Access Time - 5.6 ms

Burst Rate - 104mb/s

[newton77]

hi,

yeah that looks ok, and yeah the promise onboard controller has a PCIEx1 Gen1 connection ie, real data bandwidth of 200MB/s so you'll never see any thing over that (i've tried).


BTW. what block size are you using in HD tune (go to the what looks like gears (options) button on the top menu, then benchmark) thanks.

..

[RTK]

I used the default settings for HD Tune and that was set at 64kb.

[newton77]

cheers 

if your still checking this thread... > do you want to know what my four 74GB raptors get at the same test?

..

[RTK]

Absolutley. I'd also like to know about the Cheeta 15k on the controller when you get those hooked up.

Are the Raptors in RAID and on a controller card?

[newton77]

Hi,  yeah there on the adaptec 5405, but to be honest the poor interconnection of the SB600 or Promise onboard controllers as more of an effect on performance than it being a "software" RAID or hardware RAID, i had them (the raptors) running on an nForce3 SB before and they flew, easily as fast as being on the adaptec controller card but 12% cpu utilization, but if you run multicore that’s not a problem.

the cheetah's are still to come in to the uk probably about 3 or 4 weeks, but i haven't got the money right away, it'll be a few months probably, but stay in touch and i'll keep you updated.

anyway running 64k on HD tune,

Minimum - 135MB/s

Maximum - 252MB/s

Average - 220MB/s

Access Time - 7.7 ms

Burst Rate - 358MB/s

still packing quite a punch,.. i'm hoping the (2) cheetahs will match the (4) raptors, then leave room for another 2 at a later point to double the performance of the raptors and with half the seek times.

[Hans]

That burst rate can''t be right? It's larger than the controller can handle.
Don't believe these readings too much. They're only indications.

[newton77]

er, no the controller has a PCIe x8 connection ie, 1600MB/s real data bandwidth,

but the point is the max of four old type raptors drives with out cache is 288MB/s (4x 72MB/s), so it's cache 358MB/s,,.. on atto running 64MB this card tops nearly 700MB/s as it has 256MB ram on it, so i don't think your right there Hans (running the max size on atto the four raptors run 277MB/s sustained).

[Hans]

Ah, forgot about the controller being an Adaptec and not an onboard thingy.