Iustin Pop wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:31:44PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to list the _number_ in addition to the name of a
problematic component? The kernel trend to move all block devices into
the sdX namespace combined with the dynamic
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:31:44PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to list the _number_ in addition to the name of a
problematic component? The kernel trend to move all block devices into
the sdX namespace combined with the dynamic name allocation
Hi
a quick mail to report a bug. The option -Y is not recognized by mdadm
2.6.2. Acccording to the man page, this is an alias to --export.
By the way, are there any plan to make the --export command work with
some other commands like --examine ?
Hubert Verstraete
-
To unsubscribe from this
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 02:23:31PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Iustin Pop wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 01:31:44PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Peter Rabbitson wrote:
Hi,
Is there a way to list the _number_ in addition to the name of a
problematic component? The kernel trend to move
Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 02:23:31PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
This would not work as arrays are assembled by the kernel at boot time, at
which point there is no udev or anything else for that matter other than
/dev/sdX. And I am pretty sure my OS (debian) does not
Sometimes people confuse Bus speed with actually drive speeds. Manufactures do
it as a marketing ploy. There is the physical limitation for the internal
drive with a sustained read/write speed. Higher RPMs help. Perpendicular
technologies will too as more information passes the head in each
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007, Daniel Korstad wrote:
You say you have a RAID with three drive (I assume RAID5) with a read
performance of 133MB/s. There are lots of variables, file system
type, cache tuning, but that sounds very reasonable to me.
I just did the math quickly - assuming each drive can
Gabor Gombas wrote:
On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 04:24:31PM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
So I was asking if the component _number_, which is unique to a specific
device regardless of the assembly mechanism, can be reported in case of a
failure.
So you need to write an event-handling script and
On Wednesday June 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A question posed by a friend is this: assuming 64K blocks, if I read a
single stripe from a raid (128K, right?) then two drives will be used
(say, drive A and drive B). If I want the next 128K then which drives
are most likely to be used?
