-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On 01-Feb-2000 Rainer Mager wrote:
> Multiple responses to responses in 1 message, I hope no one gets confused...
>
>
> First off, I did some testing with normal SCSI (no RAID) (yes, I do know
> this is a RAID mailing list, but everyone is being so helpful I hope I'm
> forgiven ;-). I wrote simultaneously to each of my 4 SCSI drives as fast as
> I could (via cat /dev/zero > drive/file). Doing this produced no errors
> and I stopped it after about 15 minutes (approx 500MB per disk). I did
> receive this during the operation, though:
>
> Feb 1 22:48:13 dual kernel: (scsi1:0:0:0) Performing Domain validation.
> Feb 1 22:48:13 dual kernel: (scsi1:0:0:0) Successfully completed Domain
> validation.
This is a scsi problem.
If I read the driver source correctly it did not like something, tried to
revalidate the domain and revalidated successfully. If failed it would have
dropped speed. I would treat this message as a border case - almost failed but
decided that everything is OK to continue at the same speed.
Anybody more familiar with SCSI internals please yell at me if I am wrong.
> Feb 1 22:48:18 dual named[968]: Cleaned cache of 0 RRs
> Feb 1 22:48:18 dual named[968]: USAGE 949412898 949358898 CPU=0.12u/0.1s
> CHILDCPU=0u/0s
> Feb 1 22:48:18 dual named[968]: NSTATS 949412898 949358898 A=7 MX=2 ANY=3
> Feb 1 22:48:18 dual named[968]: XSTATS 949412898 949358898 RR=18 RNXD=1
> RFwdR=13 RDupR=0 RFail=0 RFErr=0 RErr=0 RAXFR=0 RLame=0 ROpts=0 SSysQ=4
> SAns=3 SFwdQ=6
> SDupQ=13 SErr=0 RQ=12 RIQ=0 RFwdQ=0 RDupQ=4 RTCP=0 SFwdR=13 SFail=0 SFErr=0
> SNaAns=3 SNXD=0
named stats. if you compile named yourself they are by default turned on. In
most vendor packages by default off.
>
>
> Is this normal? Should it just periodically appear?
named - yes. SCSI - do not think so...
>
> Before when I got all my timeouts is when I was doing 2 things I haven't
> tried again yet. One, I had all my SCSI drives being used a swap. Two, I was
> trying to back up to my SCSI tape drive. I'll try these again later when I'm
> ready for another crash ;-( As it is right now, everything seems stable,
> albeit a bit slow.
>
>
> Before I forget, I just wanted to say thanks to everyone's help. I really
> appreciate it. Any further ideas would be gratefully accepted.
[snip]
- ----------------------------------
Anton R. Ivanov
IP Engineer Level3 Communications
RIPE: ARI2-RIPE E-Mail: Anton Ivanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
@*** McNaughton's Rule ***
Any argument worth making within the bureaucracy must be
capable of being expressed in a simple declarative sentence
that is obviously true once stated.
- ----------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iQEVAwUBOJgZ0ylWAw/bM84zAQEUTAgAilZ/cSCVAOPtIqjWKGu5dCsTpoo9792l
2TFFo18wXS6guBT0SKMbqp76w4oHBJ0RRu+bfkMIovyK7SRecgPGIrVBedV/Unp0
DaafsMToXusJ6F3f0Y/QjkRzYWMlqCz65QS0agqIbectQ81QwZJWhItAeWtUVmpp
gnOOGPWeDvG5tjlwNlF0kopz8Upc6p3M5GokSl7fLFbhP1Zt1KkEJyczCiHkRkLx
mT3yNwokWgd3loIcxGtsMwgl5oAcPnXUJxlrnSItQrVTLzFfn0/IUcO5pNlqgC1b
UC7JGHx/qNYXvGEgnCHb49rrdZpWci5Y+LwQU32zTBor0DqEUubNjA==
=FLtA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
