Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MegaRAID MEGARAID SAS 9341-8I vs. SAS-3 3008 #489

Closed
vollkommenIrrelevant opened this issue Apr 17, 2018 · 7 comments
Closed

MegaRAID MEGARAID SAS 9341-8I vs. SAS-3 3008 #489

vollkommenIrrelevant opened this issue Apr 17, 2018 · 7 comments

Comments

@vollkommenIrrelevant
Copy link

vollkommenIrrelevant commented Apr 17, 2018

I have some Computer with a MEGARAID SAS 9341-8I. Fusioninventory know it as SAS-3 3008 which is in fact only the chipset.
The former Modells (LSI-branded) are recognized correctly.

@g-bougard
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @vollkommenIrrelevant
can you confirm the agent version you're using and on which OS ?
If you have megasasctl on your system, can you provide the megasasctl -v output run as root ?

@vollkommenIrrelevant
Copy link
Author

agent 2.4, OS Windows 7 X64. I have no machine for testing, so it's a bit diifficult.

@g-bougard
Copy link
Contributor

megaraid support in agent is only available on Linux & BSD to list managed storages.
If you want this support on Windows, you'll have to find your way with available tools on such systems, provide us with command output or even WMI calls to use.
Eventually, does the dmidecode command reports something interesting and related ?

@vollkommenIrrelevant
Copy link
Author

vollkommenIrrelevant commented Jul 30, 2018

Maybe this will be helpfull:

[SCSI]
Element Wert
Name LSI MegaRAID SAS 9341-8i
Hersteller LSI Corp.
Status OK
PNP-Gerätekennung PCI\VEN_1000&DEV_005F&SUBSYS_93411000&REV_02\4&1DA87BB8&0&0008

@g-bougard
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @vollkommenIrrelevant
can you explain how you obtain that informations ?

@vollkommenIrrelevant
Copy link
Author

I took this Information from the MSInfo32

@vollkommenIrrelevant
Copy link
Author

had been corrected with 2.4.1

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants