>>> "Carlos E. R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 2007-05-08 14:32:59 >>> > > The Tuesday 2007-05-08 at 13:09 +0200, Wilfred van Velzen wrote: > > > Not too busy, but busy enough during work hours, because the 30% hasn't > > moved yet... > > Probably busy enough that the test doesn't progress (much). If the test is > well designed, the normal disk activity has priority.
It seems that way. > Probably you just have to wait longer and see. I'm in no hurry, I'll wait until tomorrow, by which time the remaining 30% should be finished. > There is a trick, although you may not like it. f the raid is in software, > you can deactivate one of the hard disks (simulate a failure). The other > disk(s) take over the load, the failed one goes idle, and the test can > happily progress on that one. However, if the other disk goes down in the > interval... ouch :-( It's software raid, and I thought of this, but don't like it... ;) > > smartctl -l error /dev/sdb > > > > But that shows the same output as the -a option... > > Ah... > > I expected something like this (I see it with -a): > > SMART Error Log Version: 1 > ATA Error Count: 251 (device log contains only the most recent five errors) > ... There are no errors in the log: # smartctl -l error /dev/sdb smartctl version 5.37 [x86_64-suse-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-6 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART Error Log Version: 1 No Errors Logged > > I'll advice the one who controls the money to order a spare one in > > advance, so we can replace it if necessary. It's one of the disks in a > > raid 1 configuration, so it shouldn't be an immediate problem if one > > disk fails... > > In the case of a production server that you consider important enough to > have a raid, it should always be important to have a disks spare at hand, > errors or not ;-) It's production. It would be inconveniant if it wasn't available, but we could do without it for the time it takes to get a spare disk. But I agree with you! ;) > Also, you know that you can have an "active spare" inside the raid. If > there is a problem, it will immediately activate it and switch over. The > disadvantage is, obviously, that the spare is powered up, although idle. > In those cases, I would have an spare outside, too - maybe I'm too > paranoid ;-) There isn't room inside the server (it's a 1U 19" with only two HD drive bays), so I don't have to consider this. ;) Met vriendelijke groet / Best regards, Wilfred van Velzen -- SERCOM Regeltechniek b.v. Heereweg 9 2161 AB Lisse Nederland +31 (0)252 416530 (voice) +31 (0)252 419481 (fax) <http://www.sercom.nl/> Op al onze offertes, op alle opdrachten aan ons en op alle met ons gesloten overeenkomsten zijn toepasselijk de METAALUNIEVOORWAARDEN, gedeponeerd ter Griffie van de Rechtbank te Rotterdam, zoals deze luiden volgens de laatstelijk aldaar neergelegde tekst. De leveringsvoorwaarden worden u op verzoek toegezonden. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
