On Tuesday February 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I had my first failure today, when I got a report that one drive
(/dev/sdam) failed. I've attached the output of mdadm --detail. It
appears that two drives are listed as removed, but the array is
still functioning. What does this mean? How
On Monday February 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 03:07:44PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
On Sunday February 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
It seems like a good way to avoid the performance problems of raid-5
/raid-6
I think there are better ways
On Sunday February 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:31:22 +0100
Janek Kozicki [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
oh, right - Sevrin Robstad has a good idea to solve your problem -
create raid6 with one missing member. And add this member, when you
have it, next year or such.
On Saturday February 16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
found was a few months old. Is it likely that RAID5 to RAID6
reshaping will be implemented in the next 12 to 18 months (my rough
Certainly possible.
I won't say it is likely until it is actually done. And by then it
will be definite :-)
i.e.
On Sunday February 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
any opinions on suns zfs/raid-z?
It's vaguely interesting. I'm not sold on the idea though.
It seems like a good way to avoid the performance problems of raid-5
/raid-6
I think there are better ways.
But does it stripe? One could
On Sunday February 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried to create a raid6 with one missing member, but it fails.
It works fine to create a raid6 with two missing members. Is it supposed
to be like that ?
No, it isn't supposed to be like that, but currently it is.
The easiest approach if to
On Thursday February 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As I understand it, there are 2 valid algoritms for writing in raid5.
1. calculate the parity data by XOR'ing all data of the relevant data
chunks.
2. calculate the parity data by kind of XOR-subtracting the old data to
be changed, and then
On Thursday February 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 05 February 2008 03:02:00 Neil Brown wrote:
On Monday February 4, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems the other topic wasn't quite clear...
not necessarily. sometimes it helps to repeat your question. there
is a lot of noise
On Friday February 8, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 07:25:31AM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
On Thursday February 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So I hereby give the idea for inspiration to kernel hackers.
and I hereby invite you to read the code ;-)
I did some reading
On Wednesday February 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Maybe the kernel has been told to forget about the partitions of
/dev/sdb.
But fdisk/cfdisk has no problem whatsoever finding the partitions .
It is looking at the partition table on disk. Not at the kernel's
idea of partitions, which
On Wednesday February 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
4. Would it be possible to later '--grow' the array to use 4 discs in
raid10 ? Even with far=2 ?
No.
Well if by later you mean in five years, then maybe. But the
code doesn't currently exist.
That's a
On Wednesday February 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
% cat /proc/partitions
major minor #blocks name
8 0 390711384 sda
8 1 390708801 sda1
816 390711384 sdb
817 390708801 sdb1
832 390711384 sdc
833 390708801 sdc1
848 390710327 sdd
On Wednesday February 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We implemented the option to select kernel page sizes of 4, 16, 64
and 256 kB for some PowerPC systems (440SPe, to be precise). A nice
graphics of the effect can be found here:
On Wednesday February 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
Hi
I am looking at revising our howto. I see a number of places where a
chunk size of 32 kiB is recommended, and even recommendations on
maybe using sizes of 4 kiB.
Depending on the raid level, a write
On Thursday February 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, why does a SATA-II drive not deliver something like 300 MB/s?
Are you serious?
I high end 15000RPM enterprise grade drive such as the Seagate
Cheetah® 15K.6 Hard Drives only deliver 164MB/sec.
The SATA Bus might be able to deliver
On Tuesday February 5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Feb 5 11:56:12 raid01 kernel: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request at
virtual address 001cd901
This looks like some sort of memory corruption.
Feb 5 11:56:12 raid01 kernel: EIP is at md_do_sync+0x629/0xa32
This tells us what code is
On Tuesday February 5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
% mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdb1
mdadm: Couldn't open /dev/sdb1 for write - not zeroing
That's weird.
Why can't it open it?
Maybe you aren't running as root (The '%' prompt is suspicious).
Maybe the kernel has been told to forget about the
On Monday February 4, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
[multipath] [faulty]
md1 : active raid5 sdc[0] sdb[5](S) sdf[3] sde[2] sdd[1]
1465159488 blocks super 0.91 level 5, 64k
On Monday February 4, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Seems the other topic wasn't quite clear...
not necessarily. sometimes it helps to repeat your question. there
is a lot of noise on the internet and somethings important things get
missed... :-)
Occasionally a disk is kicked for being non-fresh
On Sunday February 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Maybe I'll buy three HDDs to put a raid10 on them. And get the total
capacity of 1.5 of a disc. 'man 4 md' indicates that this is possible
and should work.
I'm wondering - how a single disc failure is handled in such configuration?
1.
On Thursday January 31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello linux-raid.
i have DEBIAN.
raid01:/# mdadm -V
mdadm - v2.6.4 - 19th October 2007
raid01:/# mdadm -D /dev/md1
/dev/md1:
Version : 00.91.03
Creation Time : Tue Nov 13 18:42:36 2007
Raid Level : raid5
Delta
On Saturday February 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Çäðàâñòâóéòå, linux-raid.
Help please, How i can to fight THIS :
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# mdadm -I /dev/sdb
mdadm: /dev/sdb has different metadata to chosen array /dev/md1 0.91 0.90.
Apparently mdadm -I doesn't work with arrays that are in
On Monday February 4, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
raid01:/etc# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
[multipath] [faulty]
md1 : active(auto-read-only) raid5 sdc[0] sdb[5](S) sdf[3] sde[2] sdd[1]
^^^
On Friday February 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Summarizing, I have two questions about the behavior of Linux md with
slow devices:
1. Is it possible to modify some kind of time-out parameter on the
mdadm tool so the slow device wouldn't be marked as faulty because of
its slow
On Friday February 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
I have the following problem with my softraid (raid 1). I'm running
Ubuntu 7.10 64bit with kernel 2.6.22-14-generic.
After every reboot my first boot partition in md0 is not synchron. One
of the disks (the sdb1) is removed.
After a
On Monday January 28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
It seems that mdadm/md do not perform proper sanity checks before adding a
component to a degraded array. If the size of the new component is just
right,
the superblock information will overlap with the data area. This will happen
On Monday January 28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
It seems that mdadm/md do not perform proper sanity checks before adding a
component to a degraded array. If the size of the new component is just
right,
the superblock information will overlap with the data area. This will happen
On Monday January 28, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps I'm mistaken but I though it was possible to do boot from
/dev/md/all1.
It is my understanding that grub cannot boot from RAID.
You can boot from raid1 by the expedient of booting from one of the
halves.
A common approach is to make a
On Sunday January 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2008/01/msg00921.html
Are they regarded as a stable feature? If so I'd like to see distributions
supporting them by default. I've started a discussion in Debian on this
topic, see the above URL for
On Sunday January 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
I have tried to make a striping raid out of my new 4 x 1 TB
SATA-2 disks. I tried raid10,f2 in several ways:
1: md0 = raid10,f2 of sda1+sdb1, md1= raid10,f2 of sdc1+sdd1, md2 = raid0
of md0+md1
2: md0 = raid0 of sda1+sdb1, md1= raid0 of
On Sunday January 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:13:30AM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
On Sunday January 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi
I have tried to make a striping raid out of my new 4 x 1 TB
SATA-2 disks. I tried raid10,f2 in several ways:
1: md0
On Wednesday January 23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm not sure this is completely linux-raid related, but I can't figure out
where to start:
A few days ago, my server died. I was able to log in and salvage this content
of dmesg:
http://pastebin.com/m4af616df
At line 194:
a new function 'flush_pending_writes' to give that attention,
and call it in freeze_array to be sure that we aren't waiting on raid1d.
Thanks to K.Tanaka [EMAIL PROTECTED] for finding and reporting
this problem.
Cc: K.Tanaka [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
### Diffstat
On Tuesday January 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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
On Sunday January 20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've got a raid5 array with 5 disks where 2 failed. The failures are
occasional and only on a few sectors so I tried to assemble it with 4
disks anyway:
# mdadm -A -f -R /dev/mdnumber /dev/disk1 /dev/disk2 /dev/disk3 /dev/disk4
However mdadm
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 cpu: since reboot it used about 11min in 24h, which is quite
a lot even for a busy array
On Monday January 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The command is
mdadm -A --verbose -f -R /dev/md3 /dev/sda4 /dev/sdc4 /dev/sde4 /dev/sdd4
The failed areas are sdb4 (which I didn't include above) and sdd4. I
did a dd if=/dev/sdb4 of=/dev/hda4 bs=512 conv=noerror and it
complained about
On Thursday January 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:23:30 +0100 Jiri Slaby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 01/17/2008 11:35 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/akpm/patches/2.6/2.6.24-rc8/2.6.24-rc8-mm1/
still the same md issue
On Tuesday January 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 16 Jan 2008 00:09:31 -0700 Dan Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
heheh.
it's really easy to reproduce the hang without the patch -- i could
hang the box in under 20 min on 2.6.22+ w/XFS and raid5 on 7x750GB.
i'll try with
On Wednesday January 16, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
p34:~# mdadm /dev/md3 --zero-superblock
p34:~# mdadm --examine --scan
ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid1 num-devices=2
UUID=f463057c:9a696419:3bcb794a:7aaa12b2
ARRAY /dev/md1 level=raid1 num-devices=2
UUID=98e4948c:c6685f82:e082fd95:e7f45529
ARRAY
On Monday January 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:31PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
Due to possible deadlock issues we need to use a schedule work to
kobject_del an 'rdev' object from a different thread.
A recent change means that kobject_add no longer gets a
On Monday January 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 02:21:45PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
Maybe it isn't there any more
Once upon a time, when I
echo remove /sys/block/mdX/md/dev-YYY/state
Egads. And just what will protect you from parallel callers
before the drop, and we are safe...
Comments?
NeilBrown
Signed-off-by: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
### Diffstat output
./drivers/md/md.c | 35 ++-
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff .prev/drivers/md/md.c ./drivers/md/md.c
--- .prev/drivers/md
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:16:34PM +1100, CaT wrote:
But I suspect that --assemble --force would do the right thing.
Without more details, it is hard to say for sure.
I suspect so aswell but throwing caution into the wind erks me wrt
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks to me like md inspects and attempts to assemble after each
drive controller is scanned (from dmesg, there appears to be a failed
bind on the first three devices after they are scanned, and then again
when the second controller is
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
distro: Ubuntu 7.10
Two files show up...
85-mdadm.rules:
# This file causes block devices with Linux RAID (mdadm) signatures to
# automatically cause mdadm to be run.
# See udev(8) for syntax
SUBSYSTEM==block, ACTION==add|change,
as it detects
the devices. So is it possible that the spare is not the last drive to
be detected and mdadm assembles too soon?
Neil Brown wrote:
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It looks to me like md inspects and attempts to assemble after each
drive controller
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(Sorry- yes it looks like I posted an incorrect dmesg extract)
This still doesn't seem to match your description.
I see:
[ 41.247389] md: bindsdf1
[ 41.247584] md: bindsdb1
[ 41.247787] md: bindsda1
[ 41.247971] md: bindsdc1
[
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I am starting to dig into the Block subsystem to try and uncover the
reason for some data I lost recently. My situation is that I have
multiple block drivers on top of each other and am wondering how the
effectss of a raid 5 rebuild
On Thursday January 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 10, 2008 12:13 AM, dean gaudet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
w.r.t. dan's cfq comments -- i really don't know the details, but does
this mean cfq will misattribute the IO to the wrong user/process? or is
it just a concern that CPU time
of make_request, like this.
Can you test it please? Does it seem reasonable?
Thanks,
NeilBrown
Signed-off-by: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
### Diffstat output
./drivers/md/md.c|2 +-
./drivers/md/raid5.c |4 +++-
2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff .prev
On Wednesday January 9, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 9, 2008 5:09 PM, Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday January 9, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can you test it please?
This passes my failure case.
Thanks!
Does it seem reasonable?
What do you think about limiting
On Wednesday January 9, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd provide data dumps of --examine and friends but I'm in a situation
where transferring the data would be a right pain. I'll do it if need
be, though.
So, what can I do?
Well, providing the output of --examine would help a lot.
But I
On Monday January 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Problem is not raid, or at least not obviously raid related. The
problem is that the whole disk, /dev/hdb is unavailable.
Maybe check /sys/block/hdb/holders ? lsof /dev/hdb ?
good luck :-)
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the
On Saturday January 5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I need to monitor my RAID and if it fails, I'd like to call my-script to
deal with the failure.
I did:
mdadm --monitor --program my-script --delay 60 /dev/md1
And then, I simulate a failure with
mdadm --manage --set-faulty
On Monday January 7, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Jan 7, 2008 6:44 AM, Radu Rendec [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm experiencing trouble when trying to add a new disk to a raid 1 array
after having replaced a faulty disk.
[..]
# mdadm --version
mdadm - v2.6.2 - 21st May 2007
[..]
On Saturday January 5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since /dev/hdb5 has been part of this array before you should use
--re-add instead of --add.
Kind regards,
Alex.
That is not correct.
--re-add is only needed for arrays without metadata, for which you use
--build to start them.
NeilBrown
-
On Saturday January 5, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# mdadm /dev/md0 --add /dev/hdb5
mdadm: Cannot open /dev/hdb5: Device or resource busy
All the solutions I've been able to google fail with the busy. There is
nothing that I can find that might be using /dev/hdb5 except
On Thursday January 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what happens if I try to _use_ that /sys entry? For instance run a
script which reads data, or sets the stripe_cache_size higher, or
whatever? Do I get back status, ignored, or system issues?
Try it:-)
The stripe_cache_size attributes
:
Signed-off-by: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
### Diffstat output
./drivers/md/raid5.c |2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff .prev/drivers/md/raid5.c ./drivers/md/raid5.c
--- .prev/drivers/md/raid5.c2008-01-04 09:20:54.0 +1100
+++ ./drivers/md/raid5.c2008
a linked chain of asynchronous operations.
---
From: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Technically that should probably be
From: Dan Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED]
now, and then I add
Acked-by: NeilBrown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
because I completely agree with your improvement.
We should keep an eye out
On Wednesday January 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This isn't a high priority issue or anything, but I'm curious:
I --stop(ped) an array but /sys/block/md2 remained largely populated.
Is that intentional?
It is expected.
Because of the way that md devices are created (just open the
On Monday December 31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm hoping that if I can get raid5 to continue despite the errors, I
can bring back up enough of the server to continue, a bit like the
remount-ro option in ext2/ext3.
If not, oh well...
Sorry, but it is oh well.
I could probably make it
On Wednesday December 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/19/07, Jon Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/19/07, Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I tried to stop the array:
mdadm --stop /dev/md2
and mdadm never came
On Wednesday December 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm thinking of slowly replacing disks in my raid5 array with bigger
disks and then resize the array to fill up the new disks. Is this
possible? Basically I would like to go from:
3 x 500gig RAID5 to 3 x 1tb RAID5, thereby going from
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This just happened to me.
Create raid with:
mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=3
--spare-devices=0 --layout=o2 /dev/sdb3 /dev/sdc3 /dev/sdd3
cat /proc/mdstat
md2 : active raid10 sdd3[2] sdc3[1] sdb3[0]
5855424
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're investigating the possibility of running Linux (RHEL) on top of
Sun's X4500 Thumper box:
http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/
Basically, it's a server with 48 SATA hard drives. No hardware RAID.
It's designed for Sun's ZFS
On Monday December 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My system has crashed a couple of times, each time the two drives have
dropped off of the RAID.
Previously I simply did the following, which would take all night:
mdadm -a --re-add /dev/md2 /dev/sde3
mdadm -a --re-add /dev/md2 /dev/sdf3
On Friday December 14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gentoofs ~#mdadm --assemble /dev/md1 /dev/sdc /dev/sdd /dev/sdf
mdadm: /dev/md1 assembled from 2 drives - not enough to start the array
Try adding --run. or maybe --force.
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe
On Saturday December 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Dec 14, 2007 7:26 AM, NeilBrown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Given an fd on a block device, returns a string like
/block/sda/sda1
which can be used to find related information in /sys.
As pointed out to when you came up
On Thursday December 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What you could do is set the number of devices in the array to 3 so
they it always appears to be degraded, then rotate your backup drives
through the array. The number of dirty bits in the bitmap will
steadily grow and so resyncs will take
On Thursday December 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good morning to Neil and everyone on the list, hope your respective
days are going well.
Quick overview. We've isolated what appears to be a failure mode with
mdadm assembling RAID1 (and presumably other level) volumes which
kernel based
On Thursday December 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How do I create the internal bitmap? man mdadm didn't shed any
light and my brief excursion into google wasn't much more helpful.
mdadm --grow --bitmap=internal /dev/mdX
The version I have installed is mdadm-1.12.0-5.i386 from RedHat
On Wednesday December 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Question for you guys.
A brief history:
RHEL 4 AS
I have a partition with way to many small files on (Usually around a couple
of million) that needs to be backed up, standard
methods mean that a restore is
On Thursday December 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
here is the second version of the patch. With this version also on
setting /sys/block/*/md/sync_force_parallel the sync_thread is woken up.
Though, I still don't understand why md_wakeup_thread() is not working.
Could give a little
I think you would have more luck posting this to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - I think that is where support for device mapper
happens.
NeilBrown
On Thursday December 6, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have a problem with my RAID array under Linux after upgrading to larger
drives. I have a machine
On Sunday December 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway, the problems are back: To test my theory that everything is
alright with the CPU running within its specs, I removed one of the
drives while copying some large files yesterday. Initially, everything
seemed to work out nicely, and by the
On Sunday December 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Was curious if when running 10 DD's (which are writing to the RAID 5)
fine, no issues, suddenly all go into D-state and let the read/give it
100% priority?
So are you saying that the writes completely stalled while the read
was progressing?
On Thursday November 29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I had created a raid 5 array on 3 232GB SATA drives. I had created one
partition (for /home) formatted with either xfs or reiserfs (I do not
recall).
Last week I reinstalled my box from scratch with Ubuntu 7.10, with mdadm
v.
On Sunday November 25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 12:02:09 +0100
From: Nagilum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Nagilum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: raid5 reshape/resync
To: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Hi,
On Thursday November 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Neil,
thank you very much for your detailed answer.
Neil Brown wrote:
While it is possible to use the RAID6 P+Q information to deduce which
data block is wrong if it is known that either 0 or 1 datablocks is
wrong
On Tuesday November 27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
Dear Neil,
thank you very much for your detailed answer.
Neil Brown wrote:
While it is possible to use the RAID6 P+Q information to deduce which
data block is wrong if it is known that either 0 or 1 datablocks
On Friday November 23, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello all,
Here is a patch which allows to skip intermediate data copying between the
bio
requested to write and the disk cache in sh if the full-stripe write
operation is
on the way.
This improves the performance of write
On Thursday November 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi all,
I am running a home-grown Linux 2.6.20.11 SMP 64-bit build, and I am
wondering if there is indeed a RAID 10 personality defined in md that
can be implemented using mdadm. If so, is it available in 2.6.20.11, or
is it in a later
On Wednesday November 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Neal,
I have been looking a bit at the check/repair functionality in the
raid6 personality.
It seems that if an inconsistent stripe is found during repair, md
does not try to determine which block is corrupt (using e.g. the
On Tuesday November 20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My personal (wild) guess for this problem is, that there is somewhere a
global
lock, preventing all other CPUs to do something. At 100%s (at 80 MB/s)
there's probably not left any time frame to wake up the other CPUs or its
sufficiently
On Thursday November 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have been looking a bit at the check/repair functionality in the
raid6 personality.
It seems that if an inconsistent stripe is found during repair, md
does not try to determine which block is corrupt (using e.g. the
method in
On Thursday November 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi. I have two RAID5 arrays on an opensuse 10.3 system. They are used
together in a large LVM volume that contains a lot of data I'd rather
not have to try and backup/recreate.
md1 comes up fine and is detected by the OS on boot and
On Tuesday November 13, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
raid5-fix-unending-write-sequence.patch is in -mm and I believe is
waiting on an Acked-by from Neil?
It seems to have just been sent on to Linus, so it probably will go in
without:
Acked-By: NeilBrown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'm beginning to
On Thursday November 15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil: any comments on whether this would be desirable / useful / feasible?
1/ Have in raid4 variant which arranges the data like 'linear' is
something I am planning to do eventually. If your filesystem nows
about the geometry of the
On Monday November 12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil Brown wrote:
However there is value in regularly updating the bitmap, so add code
to periodically pause while all pending sync requests complete, then
update the bitmap. Doing this only every few seconds (the same as the
bitmap
-by: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
### Diffstat output
./drivers/md/bitmap.c | 34 +-
./drivers/md/raid1.c |1 +
./drivers/md/raid10.c |2 ++
./drivers/md/raid5.c |3 +++
./include/linux/raid/bitmap.h |3 +++
5 files
correctly, presumably due to substantial similarities between
handle_stripe5 and handle_stripe6.
This patch (with lots of context) moves the chunk of new code from
handle_stripe6 (where it isn't needed (yet)) to handle_stripe5.
Signed-off-by: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
### Diffstat output
./drivers
On Friday November 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am 02.11.2007 um 10:22 schrieb Neil Brown:
On Friday November 2, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a 5 disk version 1.0 superblock RAID5 which had an internal
bitmap that has been reported to have a size of 299 pages in /proc/
mdstat
On Thursday November 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I have raid5 /dev/md1, --chunk=128 --metadata=1.1. On it I have
created LVM volume called 'raid5', and finally a logical volume
'backup'.
Then I formatted it with command:
mkfs.ext3 -b 4096 -E stride=32 -E resize=550292480
On Tuesday October 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Which is the default type of superblock? 0.90 or 1.0?
The default default is 0.90.
However a local device can be set in mdadm.conf with e.g.
CREATE metdata=1.0
NeilBrown
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in
On Tuesday October 30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Neil Brown wrote:
On Monday October 29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I bought two new hard drives to expand my raid array today and
unfortunately one of them appears to be bad. The problem didn't arise
Looks like you are in real trouble
On Friday October 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps you could have called them 1.start, 1.end, and 1.4k in the
beginning? Isn't hindsight wonderful?
Those names seem good to me. I wonder if it is safe to generate them
in -Eb output
Maybe the key confusion here is between version
On Friday October 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can someone help me understand superblocks and MD a little bit?
I've got a raid5 array with 3 disks - sdb1, sdc1, sdd1.
--examine on these 3 drives shows correct information.
However, if I also examine the raw disk devices, sdb and sdd,
On Friday October 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've been asking on my other posts but haven't seen
a direct reply to this question:
Can MD implement timeouts so that it detects problems when
drivers don't come back?
No.
However it is possible that we will start sending the BIO_RW_FAILFAST
1 - 100 of 975 matches
Mail list logo
