Adaptec SCSI driver questions - OS2

This is a discussion on Adaptec SCSI driver questions - OS2 ; mike luther schrieb: > > Is there anything beyond the AICU160 support driver package for Adaptec SCSI > support for OS/2 dated 10-05-01 at 11:12AM? Does anyone here have comments > about model differences and so on for Adaptec SCSI ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 22 of 22

Thread: Adaptec SCSI driver questions

  1. Re: Adaptec SCSI driver questions

    mike luther schrieb:
    >
    > Is there anything beyond the AICU160 support driver package for Adaptec SCSI
    > support for OS/2 dated 10-05-01 at 11:12AM? Does anyone here have comments
    > about model differences and so on for Adaptec SCSI PCI cards for this driver as
    > to variations like we find in the U2 - U2W - U2Pro scenario for the 160 level
    > cards? Are these controllers 68 pin or 80 pin operations?
    >
    > For example, all the Seagate SCSI drives recently available are listed as U320
    > level hardware, despite that the LW versions of the drives are still 68 pin
    > technology. Twisted pair SCSI cable support is available for 68 pin
    > technology. For compatibility purposes in the hardware mix in my operation I
    > still have the 68 pin configuration hardware. Including new Seagate 15,000RPM
    > drives. But I've taken a couple curious errors over several months of use and
    > am wondering if the really safest thing to do is to move away from the U2WPro
    > version of the Adaptec cards to the higher grade controller cards just to try
    > to improve long term reliabiliy.
    >
    > Comments and information would be appreciated. Thanks!


    U320 is backward compatible to U160.

    Hendrik

  2. Re: Adaptec SCSI driver questions

    An update as to my decisions and a further question here Pete..

    Peter Brown wrote:
    >
    > I'm using a 29160N with 1* u160 and 1* u320 68 pin drives and a
    > scanner hooked to the external port. This setup has been in use for
    > around 3 years - No problems that I am aware of :-)
    >


    I bought a brand new 29160 Adaptec OEM kit box with the Adaptec cables
    in it and installed it in my mirror box for test. That box was still
    running an Adaptec U2W controller in it and I cloned my mission critical
    drive into a brand new Seagate 39GB 15KRPM 5 year SCSI U320 drive with
    the MCP2 floppy boot disks to which I added the AICU160.ADD driver on
    Disk #1. The so-revised utility boot diskette set works fine with the
    29160 card which came with firmware version 3.1.0 on it. The clone work
    is done here with Jan's DFSEE at least version 7.1.5 as disk to disk
    clone work.


    I chose, for initial purposes to keep the older lower speed level in
    place that was being used on the 40MB speed since that card in the older
    box used it. From there I substituted the new clone drive back into the
    oldest box which still has the 2940UW card in it at 40MB speeds. Only
    at that point did I update the older box to the 2940U2W Adaptec
    controller card which was pulled from the box in which I'm now testing
    the 29160 card in. For test and stability purposes I've left the speed
    on that oldest box at 40MB for now, though obviously the 2940U2W and
    cables for it are 80MB speed operations and the drive is a 320 rate drive.


    > Hardware Manager reports the driver version as 1.1 15/10/2001 - having
    > a look with an editor shows this:-
    > @#OEM:10.3#@ Adaptec Ultra160 Family Driver for OS/2 (d10.3 10/15/2001)
    >
    > I did update the 29160 BIOS to v3.10 a while back and think that is
    > the necessary (and latest) BIOS level required.
    >



    Yes, this is exactly what is in my new 29160 controller.


    > There are drivers available for Adaptec and LSI (? I think) u320
    > controllers if moving more upmarket but not having used either I can
    > comment on how well they work - or not.
    >



    Yes, I have the 320 driver here as noted, but that involves further move
    upward from the 29160 controller and they are expensive enough, sigh ..


    Now questions about the next steps in the research and mission critical
    work. I'm slowly going to move the data rates up on the 29160
    controller system to attempt to get total proof of stability on this IBM
    915GAVL motherboard box at the 160 speed rate. But one other issue is
    critical for which I would like advice and suggestions from you and
    anyone else here if possible. Then with firm initial reliability data
    on hand the plan is to update ALL the boxes to the 29160 cards and new
    drives. (Ouch but mission critical is that!)


    For years I've been using BA2K Server Pro for general total system
    backup protection on a regular basis. I had to actually use it for a
    BAII total system restore on one of these boxes that suffered a total
    jammed Seagate older drive that prompted this rebuild and upgrade
    process. That was on MCP 4.5 FP5 and it worked fine there for the
    purposes with an Adaptec 2940U2W controller card.


    But as I get faster and faster and heavier into the drive and data size
    game, and because I've found that Jan's DFSEE works MUCH faster to clone
    disk to disk than the tape, I'm looking at both the cost of the Seagate
    DAT tape drives to do this as well as the real issues of fragility in
    tape storage.


    So I've bought a couple of Lian-LI RH600 160 rate aluminum mobile drive
    trays and have begun research on stability of these with the eight or so
    SCSI drive boxes which I am closest to. Again these cases are certified
    to be OK with the 160 rate speed. And initial tests with the new
    Adaptec 29160 box seem fine for the master drive in one but .. again ..
    I've not moved the speed up to test all this at 160 rates until I have a
    complete CLONE of the drive in it ..


    Done with a second Lian-Li mobile drive tray in the box for safety.


    And that raises the question. At even the 160 data rate speed of the
    new 29160 controller card and drive level can I leave the empty RH600
    drive tray still attached to the cable in these boxes when it is not
    being used? I've had a lot of SCSI experience in termination and
    multiple cable use on these Adaptec cards over a long time. And I
    really do realize how critical it is to both use the proper cables,
    proper termination .. and even absolutely keep the cables physically
    away from other things in the box to prevent data and failure issues
    with the SCSI systems!


    Sure .. nobody messes with jamming in another drive into a tray and all
    that on a non-RAID system after bootup!! But what are the thoughts
    about leaving the empty drive tray still attached to the cable at all
    times so that when I do go to make a clone for backup of the box from a
    utility disk boot, I just have to jam the target duplicate Seagate HD
    into that empty connected tray from the front panel to do the job?


    Thanks for thoughts here!



    --


    --> Sleep well; OS2's still awake!

    Mike Luther

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2