PDA

View Full Version : Is this normal? S-ATA on Promise controller.



xortam
17th June 2006, 11:28
I ran into some peculiarities while looking into my HDD corruption. I couldn't see my corrupted drive while running the Ghost recovery environment (boot off of Ghost CD) nor when using the Seagate DiskWizzard ap under XP. I could access my other drives fine. The corrupted drive also shows up under Disk Management and Explorer fine. I don't know if this is normal or not under the configuration described below.

I have an ASUS P4C800-E MB with three Seagate drives connected. The corrupted drive is a 300 GB S-ATA connected to the on-board Promise S-ATA RAID controller with the BIOS set to support IDE. The system drive is a S-ATA disk connected to the on-board Intel RAID controller which is also set to support IDE. I also have a swappable P-ATA drive which uses a S-ATA/P-ATA converter that is also connected to the Intel RAID controller. The system and swappable drive appear as normal IDE disks off of the Intel controller while the corrupted drive appears as a SCSI disk off of the Promise controller. I also don't see the corrupted drive in the AMI BIOS setup anywhere but it is listed when the Promise BIOS loads. I've swapped the corrupted drive onto the Intel controller and it is then seen in the Ghost recovery environment and the Seagate DiskWizzard.

Is this to be expected?

High_Jumbllama
17th June 2006, 11:38
Could be that ghost does not know what the controller is?

Did this version of Ghost come out before the controller?

xortam
17th June 2006, 12:30
This it the latest version, Ghost 10.0. The Seagate DiskWizzard doesn't see it under XP either. Why does the Promise controller claim it's a SCSI device versus the Intel controller?

BTW, it's a P4C800-E Deluxe MB.

MultimediaMan
17th June 2006, 12:30
It does not appear that the Ghost recover disk has the needed drivers for the Promise Controller.

xortam
17th June 2006, 12:36
It does not appear that the Ghost recover disk has the needed drivers for the Promise Controller.I had thought of that. It ran an initial check and said it had all the drivers but I guess it still didn't detect the Promise controller. I'll see if I can get Ghost recovery to load the XP Promise drivers.

Doesn't explain the Seagate DiskWizzard problem.

Technoid
17th June 2006, 12:43
Why does the Promise controller claim it's a SCSI device versus the Intel controller?

Aparantly it's easier to write drivers if the controller says its SCSI rather than IDE.

Tho I could be wrong ;)

xortam
17th June 2006, 12:46
Aparantly it's easier to write drivers if the controller says its SCSI rather than IDE.

Tho I could be wrong ;)
So this is normal on these systems?

MultimediaMan
17th June 2006, 12:54
Add-in IDE controllers are enumerated as SCSI devices in Windows. It has more to do with the Adapter Function rather than the actual Adapter Type.

Technoid
17th June 2006, 16:09
So this is normal on these systems?

Yup ;)

Gurm
18th June 2006, 17:59
The adapters enumerate as SCSI because all IDE is ... technically ... ATAPI as far as Windows is concerned. Which means there are some limitations on it. So they enumerate as SCSI. Better/easier/faster/smaller drivers that way, and less hassles.

As for the original question - Ghost is REALLY sketchy about SATA support. That's why I use Acronis TrueImage now exclusively.

MultimediaMan
18th June 2006, 18:59
As Gurm mentioned, Ghost can be twitchy in a DOS environment.

However, in a Win32 environment it works extremely well. I use WinPEv 1.6 in conjunction with Ghost @Work; and BartPE in conjunction with Ghost @Home.