Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

I would really appreciate the SnapOS 3.4.805 please from anyone!!!!!

details are:
Snap Server 1000
S/W: 2.2.393
Hardware: 3.1.1
Serial #: 104975
Bios: 2.1.363

email: aaajustin AT gmail.com

thanks in advance

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Hi everyone, This is my first post here. A Quantum SnapServer 2200 has just come into my hands at work and we want to use it for a backup. Problem is it only currently has 2x80GB drives. I plan to install 2x300GB disks but I gather this will require an OS upgrade. I think the current OS version is 3.4.790, and the bios version is 3.4.758. Do I definately have to upgrade to support these larger disks? If an upgrade is required could someone please send me the most recent free version of the software? Thanks in advance Matt

Edit: Found the OS elsewhere, installed and seems to recognise 300GB drives OK.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Don't worry about the request above guys as I found it elsewhere on the net. I have now upgraded my 1000 with a 320Gb Seagate (16Mb cache model) and 3.4.805. It all seems to be working fine so thanks heaps to everyone on the forum, it is much appreciated.

Now I also have a 2200 without drives at all. Can I do a clone of the 1000 drive in the same way as above(and using the same 3.4.805) and put it straight in the 2200?????? How do you configure the second drive????

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

The boot drive is the only one that needs an OS, But i dont think a 1000 image will work. a 1100 image is more likely to work

Shane

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Can someone please send me a copy of 3.4.805 or later?

Info:
Snap 2000
Software: 3.1.626
H/W 2.0.0
BIOS: 2.0.252

My email is:
sholland@dcsqc.com

Thanks in advance!!

-Steve

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Can we trash this thread please joe/david?

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Soon as we do it someone will start another one.

I guess users are not reading the NOTICE at the top of the threads.

And I guess we should hide our email address too. But there are a few users that actually need help.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Sorry I didn't read the notice at the top of the forum. In fact, before I posted in here I didn't even go anywhere else on the forum but this thread.

I am very disappointed with Adaptec for charging customers for the OS upgrade. For the kind of money they are wanting for it, we can nearly build a new machine and load Linux on it!

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Depending on the age of the unit, adaptec has been giving out v3.4.807 to registered users. Register with Adaptec and see what happens, what do you have to loose.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Ok, I'm stuck with a 4100 running 3.4.790 (US) / 2.2.1 / 2.4.437

I've read this whole thread, as well as futilely bashed my head up against adaptecs (lackof)support site.

Looks like my best solution to get this thing working on my Win2K3 AD network is.... 4.0.860

So, my email address is valid *wink*wink*, and looks like this is the final resting place of old snap aficionados so I'll probably be lurking here for a while..

For for -final- clarification, I'm not going to get this up to terabyte size, am I?
Damn shame that.


TIA for any help that might be offered my way.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Hallis is looking to buy one.


And yep, your not going to get 1T, 480 gig is good.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

yah the 4100 is limited to 120gb drives. I've been looking to pick one up to mess with.

Shane

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

If I try to register the unit, the s/n comes back invalid. I am assuming this is due to it being too old? I even called Adaptec's customer service, but never got to the point to actually giving them a s/n. They absolutely would not talk to me without a support agreement. Any ides?

-S

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

There is a different SN on the bottom of most units that is not the ID number we are most familiar with.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Well, I'm bummed out. I have a spare rackmount 4u system with 6 200gb drives in it that would have been ideal for upgrading my 4100. I've never even powered the thing up. fortunately though, the one under it has 6 120g quantums in it, so there's one upgrade, and another if I can find 2 matching, and I can finally get those things out of my rack where they've been collecting dust for the past year. My poor little Rhino with 4x250's has finally run out of room on my main server.
For the life of me, I can't find v4.0.860 anywhere though. Guess I'll try and sweettalk adaptec on monday... wish me luck, lol.

edit, eww, the 120's are WD caviars. will those work ok in a 4100?

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

I guess no one read's NOTICES any more.

The 4100 can handle 300gigs @ 137gig. So yes your 120 will work. or any thing you want to put in it. But match the drives.

You will be blue :nono: in the face talking to adaptec, unless you have a maintance contract with them. Then your face will be RED :mad: , after words.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

yes, I read notices, and I also realize that if someone takes pity on me, and contacts me off the board, then that's between them and I. I can hope, anyway.

As far as capacities, Why are all the M4100 replacement drives 160GB capacity?
4x160 raid 5=480gb if I still remember second grade math and raid fundamentals.
P/N 5325301671 is what I'm referencing.
Was snap playing games with formatted capacity? Does the 160 format down to 137, and thus your 480 is really only 411?

I know to match drives.. I've been building raids since 1985, and worked with MFM / RLL / ESDI long before that.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

There is a 137gb cap on the drive no matter how large it is, you could put 4x400gb drives and each one will still only read 137gb. which sucks. I dont think it has to do with wierd things happening with the file system.

Shane

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

All well and good, but let's not get the forum in trouble in the process eh? In other words, not be so blatant about your request to people.


Because in a lot of cases, 160 GB drives are cheaper than 120 GB drives. Anyone who has been building RAID arrarys since 1985 and working with MFM/RLL/ESDI since long before that should know this. It's called economics. See? I can be condescending too. :evilaugh:

Bottom line, since you are an old hand, the 4100 DOES NOT support LBA 48-bit. Which means data above 137 GB. So yes, they use 160 GB drives, but they format down to 137 GB each (well, close).


Me too... :D

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

easeplay otay indfay ethay atestlay iverdray orfay ethay MAY
4100 eriessay atthay upportssay Indowsway 2003 ADWAY. Iway
inkthay isthay aymay ebay vay4.0.860


there, better?

Or even the latest free update. I'm on 3.4.790 (US)


I honestly had no idea that was condescending to anyone. Definately not the intent.
I was pretty much trying to get an understanding of the 4100's nomenclature, not piss in your cornflakes.

4 120's in raid 5 = 336,731 ( I'm looking at it now)
a Snap 4100 /300 I have only has 4 70 gigs, which would be raid 0. ( and cheezy at that)
Snap 4100 / 120 appears to have 4 30's. again raid 0
So, I expected the snap 480 to contain 4 120's in raid 0 configuration. ( and I just built one like that)
But then I ran across the factory 160 part number and thought, ah ha! It's really 4 160's in raid 5! which totally blew my previous understanding.

So, I guess that factory 480 was designated 4x120 at R/0? or is it 4x160 at R/5 and damn the fact we didn't include LBA-48?

I would personally NEVER put data I cared about on a striped array, unless it was mirrored as well. 0+1



Wouldn't it be 134.2? Isn't the actual calc ((2^28)*512)/1024
Again, just asking.
I certainly didn't want to come into a new forum and start shit. I just need to know the capabilities of these servers, and any hacks that might make them more useful.

Like, wouldn't it rock if we could reflash the bios to include the LBA support for the PDC20265 ASIC's? 1.5 TB R/5 Snap!s would kick ass.
Then throw on some delicately soldered Realtek GB chips, lol. awesome.

further thought on that, does the promise op code reside in flash, or is it on the 70700102-001 chip located by the power supply connector? if it's in the flash, I suppose it would be possible to desolder, read the flash and do a comparison for the old flawed promise code, insert the revised code, and reflash / resolder. then of course recompile the OS, lol. yeah yeah, I'm dreaming, but the thought of cheap terabyte 1u's is irresistable.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Getting the 4100 to do LBA 48-bit has been talked about many many many many times here on the forum. Problem is, not enough information and too much "just talking".

Converting to Gigabit has been mentioned, not near as much as the LBA 48-bit, but still. Same problem though, not enough information and no actual attempts. Very few people are willing to risk their SNAP servers on experiments. I know I'm not due to my low fixed income.

I myself do not have a 4100 (because of the LBA 48-bit limitation). I have 3 SNAP 4000's and a SNAP 1000. But, as near as I can tell from reading the info passed back and forth here, nobody knows for 100% sure if the problem is in the controller or in the flashram etc. It has been suspected that the controller will support it (based on what controller is used), but not for 100% sure. It has been speculated, just as you said, that the code could be re-written and get the 4100 to do LBA 48-bit and break the barrier. Now I am not being a smart ass here, but I have to ask. Are you willing to do the work and risk one of your SNAPs for this hack? If you are, it would most assured be welcomed with open arms here.

As for the Gigabit hack, it may very well be as simple as replacing the realtek chip. Some of the SNAP (and I am not talking Guardian units) did have Gigabit LAN, so the OS should support it if it is the right controller. Are you willing to hack your SNAP to test this out? This one would be well worth it too if someone was to make it work.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

The PDC20265 will definately support lba48. Original promise driver was bugged but they released fixes for it later.
I'm rusty but could probably extract the updated op code if I had two flash images that I could diff. MB or fasttrack, and our bios. IDAPro FTW.
I'm fairly certain snap just used the bugged promise code, and then for whatever reason neglected to update when the fix was finally released.

As far as tearing up a system, I have one system giving 60000 errors, which someone stated is a mb. if that unit isn't usable anyway, I could care less.
Don't have the supporting hardware available any longer though. I think I'm limited to eproms lol.

I definately wouldn't be comfortable doing it unless I could get in there and emulate the NVRAM, or access that diag port so I would get more than one attempt at the bootloader. I'd have to send it out to the board house and see if they could even pull that flash and put a breakout in. SMT sucks at that density.

Then there would be the issue with recompiling the OS. I haven't touched 'make' in, oh.. too long. Besides, where would I get the source to even begin to recompile with the fixed driver.
This would be simple for adaptec to fix. but I doubt it can be accomplished without the source for the existing kernal. Adaptec won't because it would hurt revenues.

gigabit is probably a pipe dream. even if the pinout is the same, I'd have to imagine some of the supporting circuitry has to be different. same problem with a driver anyway.

So, I've just talked myself out of attempting this, lol. Probably the same ending as every other discussion regarding this subject. damned shame is all I can say.

Unless of course they updated the OS driver in one of the later releases, and the only problem is the bootloader still running the bugged code.
hmmmm.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

The Gigabit is a better odds deal IMO. Sometimes the support components are different and sometimes not. The only way to know for sure it to swap the chip and find out... My SNAPs are in use and I cannot afford to attempt the hack, but if you have a unit (MB) you can play with, then...... It would help to know what GB chip was used by Adaptec in the GB SNAP (not guardian) servers. Sorry, that I do not know.

David, I forget, which of the SNAP servers was Gigabit that was not Guardian? The 4400 and 14000 are both Guardian right? 12000? I know I saw one was, I just can't remember which one it was....

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

I am in the process of aquiring another snap 4100 just to play with, 'cause like you said I am NOT going to risk my production unit. Hopefully in the next few months I will be able to start working on some of the snap 4100 limitations.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

I have 1/2 of the flashram for a 2000. The other 1/2 is soldered in. I have a programmer with the apporiated TSOP Socket.

The sup file may shed more light. But every thing I was in Intel HEX. So with out a decompillers and complier we are SOL, No Source Code.

I do not recall any SnapOS NAS having gigaports. Only Guardian Units. It's possiable the HW is but SW is NOT. Just because a Gigaport chip is used, does not mean they have to provide code for it. They may have bought a truck load and just used it due to cost.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

The original 75-Gb hd in my 2200 died after 4 yrs of hard work, and the second one is obviously ready to follow. I bought two Seagate 250-Gb replacements (very quiet unlike the original Maxtor junk!). The OS 3.4.772 refused to format the new disk beyond 137 Mb. :( Seems like OS 3.4.805 is the way to go.

Installed 3.4.807 - worked like a clock!:) See the wiki for mirror rebuilding instructions:
http://wiki.procooling.com/index.php...air_for_Orphan

Seagate drives however generate more heat. Will need to install a new fan with bigger CFM.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

I would love to get a copy of 4.x.x, if anyone has it?

email: johnsmithna AT yahoo.com

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

:uhh: Me too? :) I am trying to track down 3.4.803 for my 4100. Since I read the entire thread I now know 3.4.805 or 3.4.807 wouldn't do me any good.

Software - 3.1.618 (US)
Hardware - 2.2.1
Serial# - 502391
BIOS - 2.4.437

bug1124 at gmail dot com

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

You didn't read it carefully enough, bug.
Either 3.4.805 or 3.4.807 are necessary, but also sufficient to work with large-size drives. The real benefits of version 4.x are only marginal.

Re: Snap OS 3.4.805, anyone?
 

Actually he read it well enough. The 4.0 would just add more bloat to the system so unless he needs AD2003 support then he doesnt need 4 for sure. And since the 4100 doesnt support >137gb drives then os 3.4.805 or greater wouldn't offer him anything that he doesnt have in 3.4.803.

Shane