Re: A question from me...
- From: "Chad A. Gross [SBS MVP]" <chad.gross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 May 2005 11:54:09 -0500
Hi Mariette -
Sorry I don't have an answer for you - just a similar experience. We have
one server that is an Intel box - Intel MB, processor, case & SCSI hot-swap
bay. It was the first Intel server we placed in production for a client,
and it most likely will be the very last Intel box we ever place - because
of similar freaky issues. This server started out with an Intel RAID
controller as well - and after fighting file access errors for 6 weeks,
convinced the system builder to replace the Intel RAID controller with an
Adaptec RAID controller under warranty. Switching to Adaptec RAID solved
most of the file access issues - but not all of them. We had to move their
accounting data to a completely different box so it would be usable. I
loaded a spare copy of Windows Server 2003 on a low-end workstation: 2Ghz
Celeron / 256 RAM / single 40GB IDE HD. Their big job-costing reports that
they run out of the accounting system render in about 10-12 seconds with the
data on the low-end member server. Move the accounting data to the SBS
(dual 2.8 Ghz Xeons, 2 gig RAM, 15k SCSI RAID 5) and that same report takes
approx. 23 MINUTES to render, and just navigating around the app takes 4-5
times longer with the data on the SBS. I've spent months troubleshooting
this - Intel support has had me run every test known to man - and they
insist it is not an issue with their hardware. We've gone so far as to have
the accounting app partner install the application and their data on our
internal network (our SBS was built the exact same time as this client's -
and the only thing different between them is the MB / Case / Hot-Swap
controller - same procs, drives, ram, etc.). The accounting app flies on
our network with the data on the SBS. I've even gone so far as to take this
customer's SBS offline for a weekend, blow it away and install regular
Windows Server 2003, load up the accounting data and have one of their
workstations access the system - it's slightly faster than when full SBS
Premium is running on the box - but still nowhere near the performance they
get from the cheap little member server the data normally lives on. It's
just super-frustrating, and this experience has caused me to loose a lot of
faith in Intel . . .
--
Chad A. Gross - SBS MVP
SBS ROCKS!
www.msmvps.com/cgross
www.gosbs.org
Mariette Knap [SBS MVP] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It hardly never happens that I ask a question my self but I have an
> issue with a new server I cannot seem to fix. The new server has the
> following hardware:
>
> 1 x Intel® Entry Server Board S875WP1-E:
> http://www.intel.com/design/servers/s875wp1-e/
>
> 2 x WD Raptor 74 GB Hard Drives ( WD740GD ):
> http://www.wdc.com/en/products/Products.asp?DriveID=65
>
> http://www.kingston.com
> 4 x Kingston KVR400X72C3A/1G total 4 Gb
>
> Issue 1.
> The S875WP1-E has an onboard Adapter HostRaid. In order for this to
> work in Raid mode you need to boot from the Intel Support CD and
> choose Activate Raid Mode, this is what I did. I then booted and
> pressed CTRL-A to enter the Raid configuration and created a Raid-1
> array using both Raptor hard drives. After doing this I am no longer
> able to boot from CD or floppy. This behaviour is described in:
>
> Intel® Server Board S875WP1-E - CD-ROM and/or Floppy Drive Boot
> Failure When Using Serial ATA RAID:
> http://support.intel.com/support/motherboards/server/s875wp1-e/sb/cs-009932.htm
>
> The document suggests that you upgrade the Bios to a version greater
> then P14. The server was delivered with P17, I upgraded the Bios to
> version P18. The issue still remains.
>
> Now comes the strange part. If I take out the two Raptors and put in
> some other SATA drives I had no problems or what so ever. Could it be
> that the Raid controller could not write the first bytes of the Array
> with the Raptors installed?
>
> Issue 2.
> As above written the server is equipped with 4 banks of 1Gb Kingston
> Ram. When booting the server it only mentions 3928 Mb and this is
> also the case if I install an OS without raid. Windows report 3928 Gb
> instead of the expected 4096 Mb. When I boot with 2 banks installed I
> get the correct value, 2048 Mb installed. On the Intel site it is
> mentioned that the Ram should be a 2.5 volt version but at Kingston
> they say that a 2.6 volt version is the only that will work on the
> Intel S875WP1-E. I have changed Ram to 2.5 volt banks but that did
> not fix the Raid problem. I could not determine if it reports also
> less then 4 Gb because I did not have that amount of Ram available in
> 2.5 volt versions.
> I have escalated this problem at Intel but have not received an
> answer (yet) and hoped that somebody else encountered similar
> problems and has a solution.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A question from me...
- From: Mariette Knap [SBS MVP]
- Re: A question from me...
- References:
- A question from me...
- From: Mariette Knap [SBS MVP]
- A question from me...
- Prev by Date: Re: test
- Next by Date: Re: Anybody know a good program to copy BKF files to DVD's
- Previous by thread: Re: A question from me...
- Next by thread: Re: A question from me...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
