I have two Seagate ST1000NM0033 1TB SATA drives in a RAID 1 array on my MOBO’s Intel ICH10R RAID controller with Intel Rapid Storage Technology Manager v.8.9.0.1023. OS is Windows 7 SP1 x64.
I also have an external Seagate ST3500418AS 500GB SATA drive in an eSATA enclosure connected to the MOBO’s separate Marvell 6GB/s controller on an eSATA port. This drive was the system boot drive in a RAID 1 array on the same MOBO before I installed the 1TB drives and transferred the system to the new 1TB drives. There is still some data on the old drive I would like to access occasionally, but whenever I bring the eSATA drive online, either at boot or after, the Intel RST Manager shows as not working. The only way to make the Intel RST Manager start working again is to take the eSATA drive offline and re-boot.
I thought that maybe it was the fact that the old drive was still marked as active, so I used DiskPart to mark the drive as “Inactive”, since I couldn’t see any reason to boot from this drive again anyway. Made no difference.
Also, Windows Explorer does not list the drives in the usual order. In my experience, when you have two HDD’s, each with one Primary and one Extended partition, Windows will list the Primary partitions of each drive first, with the Extended partitions listed next in order (e.g., first physical drive primary partition – C:, second physical drive primary partition – D:, first physical drive extended partition – E:, second physical drive extended partition – F: ).
However, Windows Explorer is showing my eSATA old drive at the end of my drive letter list as L: & M: ( drive letters C: through K: were already assigned) in the actual partition order on that drive. In other words, the new L: used to be C: and the new M: used to be D: on the old drive.
I like this drive letter assignment a LOT better than having Windows re-arrange all the existing drive letters when a new HDD is introduced into the system. It’s much less confusing. But it bothers me because I don’t think that’s the way the OS usually does it, plus the fact that RST stops running when the eSATA drive is brought online makes me think I have a conflict somewhere.
Any ideas?
I also have an external Seagate ST3500418AS 500GB SATA drive in an eSATA enclosure connected to the MOBO’s separate Marvell 6GB/s controller on an eSATA port. This drive was the system boot drive in a RAID 1 array on the same MOBO before I installed the 1TB drives and transferred the system to the new 1TB drives. There is still some data on the old drive I would like to access occasionally, but whenever I bring the eSATA drive online, either at boot or after, the Intel RST Manager shows as not working. The only way to make the Intel RST Manager start working again is to take the eSATA drive offline and re-boot.
I thought that maybe it was the fact that the old drive was still marked as active, so I used DiskPart to mark the drive as “Inactive”, since I couldn’t see any reason to boot from this drive again anyway. Made no difference.
Also, Windows Explorer does not list the drives in the usual order. In my experience, when you have two HDD’s, each with one Primary and one Extended partition, Windows will list the Primary partitions of each drive first, with the Extended partitions listed next in order (e.g., first physical drive primary partition – C:, second physical drive primary partition – D:, first physical drive extended partition – E:, second physical drive extended partition – F: ).
However, Windows Explorer is showing my eSATA old drive at the end of my drive letter list as L: & M: ( drive letters C: through K: were already assigned) in the actual partition order on that drive. In other words, the new L: used to be C: and the new M: used to be D: on the old drive.
I like this drive letter assignment a LOT better than having Windows re-arrange all the existing drive letters when a new HDD is introduced into the system. It’s much less confusing. But it bothers me because I don’t think that’s the way the OS usually does it, plus the fact that RST stops running when the eSATA drive is brought online makes me think I have a conflict somewhere.
Any ideas?
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram