On Wed, 1 Feb 2006, Nick Holland wrote:
SNIP
Welcome to the REALITY of RAID.
If you rely on RAID to always work, and never go down, you Just Don't
Understand.
SNIP
Doesn't matter about drive type, doesn't really matter about device
drivers, there are PLENTY of things that CAN and WILL cause
Nick Holland wrote:
Welcome to the REALITY of RAID.
If you rely on RAID to always work, and never go down, you Just Don't
Understand.
...
If hardware breaks, don't expect everything else to keep working.
Hope,
sure. Expect? No. I don't care if you are talking about ccd,
RAIDframe,
On 2/2/06, Peter Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have yet to have a windows machine die because of a disk failure
when mirrored.
ok, I'll take the bait. you are documenting simply, that you had luck
in the past, perhaps also due to some good hardware (although
I do not trust those $25
On 1 feb 2006, at 08.38, Jurjen Oskam wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:19:58AM -0500, Peter wrote:
raid0: Device already configured!
ioctl (RAIDFRAME_CONFIGURE) failed
Can anyone lend a hand in this important matter?
Let me guess (since you didn't post any configuration): you
enabled
--- Ho?=kan Olsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1 feb 2006, at 08.38, Jurjen Oskam wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:19:58AM -0500, Peter wrote:
raid0: Device already configured!
ioctl (RAIDFRAME_CONFIGURE) failed
Can anyone lend a hand in this important matter?
Let me guess
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 08:45:42AM -0500, Peter wrote:
--- Ho?=kan Olsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1 feb 2006, at 08.38, Jurjen Oskam wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:19:58AM -0500, Peter wrote:
raid0: Device already configured!
ioctl (RAIDFRAME_CONFIGURE) failed
Can
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E5kan_Olsson?= writes:
On 1 feb 2006, at 08.38, Jurjen Oskam wrote:
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:19:58AM -0500, Peter wrote:
raid0: Device already configured!
ioctl (RAIDFRAME_CONFIGURE) failed
Can anyone lend a hand in this important matter?
Let me guess (since
Side question:
I tried unsuccessfully using the same procedure to set up two disks (sd0
and sd1) attached to a QLogic FibreChannel controller (isp driver). I
probably don't have the correct terminology but upon startup the boot code
could not be found (would not get beyond the point where
I had a disk drive fail while running RAIDframe.
The system did not survive the failure. Even worse
there was data loss.
The system was to be my new web server. The system
had 1 Gig of memory. I was working, slowly, on
configuring apache and web pages. Moving to
a chroot'ed environment was none
Peter writes:
I tried unsuccessfully using the same procedure to set up two disks (sd0
and sd1) attached to a QLogic FibreChannel controller (isp driver). I
probably don't have the correct terminology but upon startup the boot code
could not be found (would not get beyond the point where the
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 11:02:22AM -0500, Peter Fraser wrote:
I had a disk drive fail while running RAIDframe.
The system did not survive the failure. Even worse
there was data loss.
The system was to be my new web server. The system
had 1 Gig of memory. I was working, slowly, on
Peter Fraser writes:
I had a disk drive fail while running RAIDframe.
The system did not survive the failure. Even worse
there was data loss.
Ow.
The system was to be my new web server. The system
had 1 Gig of memory. I was working, slowly, on
configuring apache and web pages. Moving to
You havn't said what types of disks. I've had IDE disks fail that
take down the entire system. I've had IDE disks fail but the system
remains up and happy. I've had SCSI disks fail that have made the
SCSI cards *very* unhappy (and had the system die shortly after).
None of these
On 2/1/06, Peter Fraser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But why was there a crash, I would of thought
that the system should run after a disk failure.
And even more to my surprise, about two days
of my work disappeared.
I believe, the disk drive died about 2 days before
the crash. I also believe
On 2/1/06, Greg Oster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter Fraser writes:
and as a result all file writes to the failed
drive queued up in memory,
I've never seen that behaviour... I find it hard to believe that
you'd be able to queue up 2 days worth of writes without a) any reads
being done
Andy Hayward writes:
On 2/1/06, Greg Oster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter Fraser writes:
and as a result all file writes to the failed
drive queued up in memory,
I've never seen that behaviour... I find it hard to believe that
you'd be able to queue up 2 days worth of writes
Greg Oster wrote:
Peter Fraser writes:
I had a disk drive fail while running RAIDframe.
The system did not survive the failure. Even worse
there was data loss.
Ow.
Welcome to the REALITY of RAID.
If you rely on RAID to always work, and never go down, you Just Don't
Understand.
...
You
On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 01:19:58AM -0500, Peter wrote:
raid0: Device already configured!
ioctl (RAIDFRAME_CONFIGURE) failed
Can anyone lend a hand in this important matter?
Let me guess (since you didn't post any configuration): you
enabled RAID-autoconfiguration by the kernel *and* you
18 matches
Mail list logo
