The new framework is tested on Fedora8(i386) running with kernel 2.6.23.12.
So far, I'm cleaning up the tool set for release, and plan to post it in the
near future.
Now it's ready. The scsi fault injection tool is available from the following
site.
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A
simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large
files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel
tree) is faster with reiser3.
My current main concern about XFS
Hello,
I have installed a lot of T1000 with debian/testing and official
2.6.23.9 linux kernel. All but iscsi packages come from debian
repositories. iscsi was built from SVN tree. md7 is a raid1 volume over
iscsi and I can access to this device. This morning, one of my T1000 has
Moshe Yudkowsky schrieb:
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A
simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large
files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel
tree) is faster with reiser3.
My
Moshe Yudkowsky wrote:
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A
simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large
files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel
tree) is faster with reiser3.
My current
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 05:34:14AM -0600, Moshe Yudkowsky wrote:
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
I use reiser3 and xfs. reiser3 is very good with many small files. A
simple test shows interactively perceptible results: removing large
files is faster with xfs, removing large directories (ex. the kernel
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
drivers/md/md.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
index cef9ebd..6295b90 100644
--- a/drivers/md/md.c
+++ b/drivers/md/md.c
@@ -5033,7 +5033,7 @@ static int
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
Neil Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 21 January 2008 12:15:
On Sunday January 20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A raid6 array with a spare and bitmap is idle: not mounted and with no
IO to it or any of its disks (obviously), as shown by iostat. However
it's consuming
Bill Davidsen ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 22 January 2008 17:53:
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
Neil Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 21 January 2008 12:15:
On Sunday January 20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A raid6 array with a spare and bitmap is idle: not mounted and with no
IO to it or
On Jan 22, 2008 12:29 AM, Mike Snitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
cc'ing Tanaka-san given his recent raid1 BUG report:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/1/14/515
On Jan 21, 2008 6:04 PM, Mike Snitzer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Under 2.6.22.16, I physically pulled a SATA disk (/dev/sdac, connected to
Hello,
I can not seem to be able to extend slightly a raid volume of mine. I issue
the command:
mdadm --grow --size=max /dev/md5
it completes and nothing happens. The kernel log is empty, however the even
counter on the drive is incremented by +3.
Here is what I have (yes I know that I am
Hi,
I have just built a Raid 5 array using mdadm and while it is running fine I
have a question, about identifying the order of disks in the array.
In the pre sata days you would connect your drives as follows:
Primary Master - HDA
Primary Slave - HDB
Secondary - Master - HDC
Secondary -
Michael Harris schrieb:
Hi,
I have just built a Raid 5 array using mdadm and while it is running fine I
have a question, about identifying the order of disks in the array.
In the pre sata days you would connect your drives as follows:
Primary Master - HDA
Primary Slave - HDB
Secondary -
13 matches
Mail list logo
