Need to make a single 3TB partition
in [Storage]
|
Prev: Housing two 2.5-inch hard disks in one 3.5-inch drive bay?
Next: Problem with Promise PCI SATA controller
From: Yousuf Khan on 2 Apr 2010 11:49 Daniel Prince wrote: > Why do you need the two drives to be seen as one 3 TB drive and not > two 1.5 TB drive? Are you that low on drive letters? Well, I already have 4.5 TB of online disk space on this system, spread out over multiple drives. My requirement is to archive the multiple sources into a single source. I can then clear off the old stuff. Yousuf Khan
From: andy on 2 Apr 2010 13:17 Are you using something like this, which has a self-contained RAID interface? MobileSTOR MS2UT+ - 2 Bay eSATA/USB RAID/SAFE33/50 (Silver) http://store.sansdigital-shop.com/moms4.html On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 23:00:49 -0400, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: >Bought a dual-disk USB enclosure and a couple of 1.5TB drives to put >into it. First of all, the enclosure has a built in concatenation >feature. When using that, Windows and Linux both see it as an 800 GB >drive, rather than a 3000 GB drive! So I put it back to regular mode, >and we see two separate 1.5 TB drives again. > >Next I tried concatenating through Windows Disk Management. BTW, this is >Windows 7 Ultimate Edition x64. When I use the Spanned Volume wizard, it >gives the error message, "Operation is not supported by object". I then >tried converting each disk from MBR partitions to the new GPT >partitions, it accepted that. I then retried the Spanned Volume wizard, >and the same message appeared. Then I tried converting them to Dynamic >disks, but it showed the "Operation is not supported by object" message >again. I think whatever the problem is, it's from this stage where it >tries to convert to dynamic disks. So why isn't it accepting the >conversion to dynamic disks? > > Yousuf Khan
From: Arno on 2 Apr 2010 15:06 In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Yousuf Khan <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: > Char Jackson wrote: >> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:32:59 -0400, Yousuf Khan >> <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: >>> The purpose of these drives is not for full-time storage needs, they are >>> only for backup and archival requirements. Think of them as fulfilling >>> the same purpose as tape drives. So connecting them to an internal >>> SATA/RAID controller is totally out of the question, the drives in >>> question may be powered down and put away in a closet after backups. >>> >>> Yousuf Khan >> >> Sounds like you need a less expensive version of this: >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822165200 >> >> Up to 4TB capacity, multiple USB ports, 2 10/100/1000 ports, etc. > Yeah, *way* less expensive! Considering the price of the rackmount unit > you linked to ($1652), I'm not doing too badly with what I put together > at 3TB, and a cost of less than $250. I might also have trouble putting > that rackmount into a closet or cupboard later. :) > Yousuf Khan For cupboard I reccomend using 2.5" drives, far lower heat generation. I have one running in my cupboard for several years now, it is a factor. Arno -- Arno Wagner, Dr. sc. techn., Dipl. Inform., CISSP -- Email: arno(a)wagner.name GnuPG: ID: 1E25338F FP: 0C30 5782 9D93 F785 E79C 0296 797F 6B50 1E25 338F ---- Cuddly UI's are the manifestation of wishful thinking. -- Dylan Evans
From: zappo on 2 Apr 2010 16:18 Arno wrote: > In comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage Yousuf Khan > <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: >> Char Jackson wrote: >>> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:32:59 -0400, Yousuf Khan >>> <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: >>>> The purpose of these drives is not for full-time storage needs, >>>> they are only for backup and archival requirements. Think of them >>>> as fulfilling the same purpose as tape drives. So connecting them >>>> to an internal SATA/RAID controller is totally out of the >>>> question, the drives in question may be powered down and put away >>>> in a closet after backups. >>>> >>>> Yousuf Khan >>> >>> Sounds like you need a less expensive version of this: >>> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822165200 >>> >>> Up to 4TB capacity, multiple USB ports, 2 10/100/1000 ports, etc. > >> Yeah, *way* less expensive! Considering the price of the rackmount >> unit you linked to ($1652), I'm not doing too badly with what I put >> together at 3TB, and a cost of less than $250. I might also have >> trouble putting that rackmount into a closet or cupboard later. :) > >> Yousuf Khan > > For cupboard I reccomend using 2.5" drives, far lower heat > generation. I have one running in my cupboard for several > years now, it is a factor. > > Arno He's not talking about running it in his cupboard, he's talking about putting it in his cupboard after its been written to, after its been disconnected. And you can not get two 1.5TB drives in 2.5" format currently anyway.
From: Char Jackson on 2 Apr 2010 21:07
On Fri, 02 Apr 2010 11:44:25 -0400, Yousuf Khan <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: >Char Jackson wrote: >> On Thu, 01 Apr 2010 17:32:59 -0400, Yousuf Khan >> <bbbl67(a)spammenot.yahoo.com> wrote: >>> The purpose of these drives is not for full-time storage needs, they are >>> only for backup and archival requirements. Think of them as fulfilling >>> the same purpose as tape drives. So connecting them to an internal >>> SATA/RAID controller is totally out of the question, the drives in >>> question may be powered down and put away in a closet after backups. >>> >>> Yousuf Khan >> >> Sounds like you need a less expensive version of this: >> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822165200 >> >> Up to 4TB capacity, multiple USB ports, 2 10/100/1000 ports, etc. > >Yeah, *way* less expensive! Considering the price of the rackmount unit >you linked to ($1652), I'm not doing too badly with what I put together >at 3TB, and a cost of less than $250. I might also have trouble putting >that rackmount into a closet or cupboard later. :) > > Yousuf Khan I admit, I was trying to shock you a bit. :) But seriously, I was going on the assumption that your current hardware isn't doing what you need, at least so far. So my next question was whether any hardware would do what you want, and I think the answer is yes. So now it's just a matter of finding something affordable, or finding a way to make your current hardware work. |