RE: PROs and CONs of booting RAID?
We have an HP Netserver which is set up in exactly this way.. but UPS or not, if someone (perhaps intentionally) removes the power cords from the power supplys, or the machine (it's never done this yet) just crashes, what happens to the filesystem on the RAID? I like the sound of the two technologies mentioned by James Manning Matthew Clark. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roeland M.J. Meyer Sent: 02 November 1999 04:22 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'linux-raid' Subject: RE: PROs and CONs of booting RAID? Actually, on High-Availability systems (like an HP 9000 V2500 pair, sharing an EMC RAID box), the standard is to boot from an internal RAID set. The entire system is presumed to be on a UPS system. In extreme cases, there is enough local UPS installed for the system to run at least 10 minutes if the main UPS goes dead. This is in addition to dual hot-swap power supplies in each chasis.
raid0 refuses to reconstruct
Hi all! My raid0 config looks as follows: raiddev /dev/md0 raid-level1 nr-raid-disks 2 nr-spare-disks1 persistent-superblock 1 chunk-size128 device/dev/sda5 raid-disk 0 device/dev/sde1 raid-disk 1 device/dev/sdd1 spare-disk0 When booting the system, one raid-disk is not operational. When raid tries to reconstruct, I get: md0: no spare disk to reconstruct array! -- continuing in degraded mode Why doesn't raid detect my spare disk??? Uwe
Re: [new release] raidreconf utility
There's a new version of the raidreconf utility out. I call it 0.0.2. Isn't this what supposed 'LVM' to be about? (BTW there seem to be 2 different implementations of LVM on the web -- one included in 0.90 raid patch and one on http://linux.msede.com/lvm/) Can someone clarify this? A few months ago I asked what's the 'translucent' feature as well, but no reply.. :( Thanks, Egon Eckert
Re: [new release] raidreconf utility
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 01:56:06PM +0100, Egon Eckert wrote:
There's a new version of the raidreconf utility out. I call it 0.0.2.
Isn't this what supposed 'LVM' to be about? (BTW there seem to be 2
different implementations of LVM on the web -- one included in 0.90 raid
patch and one on http://linux.msede.com/lvm/)
Well, yes and no. LVM gives you pretty much the same features, the ability
to add disks to a device to grow it.
The only reason I started the raidreconf utility was, because I needed to be
able to add/remove disks from RAID arrays *today*. LVM is, from what I can
understand, still not implemented to a state where you can use it and rely
on it. I know I can rely on the RAID code in the kernel, so all I was missing
was a utility to add/remove disks from RAID sets. Now I have one, at least
for RAID-0 :)
While I'm at it, I hope to build in some conversion features too, so that you
can convert between RAID levels. The utility can already convert a single
block device into a RAID-0, but being able to convert a five disk RAID-0 into
eg. a seven disk RAID-5 would be pretty sweet I guess. Remember, this is all
functionality that, once raidreconf works, is perfectly stable and well tested,
because all the ``real'' support for the RAID levels has been in the kernels or
at least the patches for a long time now.
Can someone clarify this?
A few months ago I asked what's the 'translucent' feature as well, but no
reply.. :(
I would actually like to know about the state of LVM, HSM, and all the other
nice storage features being worked on in Linux. I wouldn't want to spend time
on this utility if it was entirely redundant. But then again, I don't think it
is, at this time. Hopefully, in a year or so, nobody will care about
raidreconf, because we have LVM working and providing even more features. Or
maybe some raidreconf code could be used for the LVM for providing the
conversion features.
Time will show:)
--
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
:.: putrid forms of man:
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
:OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.:{Konkhra}...:
RE: PROs and CONs of booting RAID?
Actually, HP-UX, on HP9000 V-class, has a journaling file system. I've got EMC coming in this afternoon, I'll ask them about the battery backup on the write-back cache. My memory may be fuzzy, but I thought it was an option, on Symetrix. I build 99.99+% sites ... that's what I do. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Matthew Clark Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 1999 1:53 AM To: linux-raid; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: PROs and CONs of booting RAID? We have an HP Netserver which is set up in exactly this way.. but UPS or not, if someone (perhaps intentionally) removes the power cords from the power supplys, or the machine (it's never done this yet) just crashes, what happens to the filesystem on the RAID? I like the sound of the two technologies mentioned by James Manning Matthew Clark. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Roeland M.J. Meyer Sent: 02 November 1999 04:22 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; 'linux-raid' Subject: RE: PROs and CONs of booting RAID? Actually, on High-Availability systems (like an HP 9000 V2500 pair, sharing an EMC RAID box), the standard is to boot from an internal RAID set. The entire system is presumed to be on a UPS system. In extreme cases, there is enough local UPS installed for the system to run at least 10 minutes if the main UPS goes dead. This is in addition to dual hot-swap power supplies in each chasis.
EXT2-fs warnings
I have an i386 machine running RH6.1, booting from a small IDE drive and running a 3 disk scsi raid 5 array. I had little trouble following the How-To to get the array set up, and by all indications it's up and running. A cat of /proc/mdstat produces [root@tiki_tiki raid]# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [raid5] read_ahead 1024 sectorsmd0 : active raid5 sdc1[2] sdb1[1] sda1[0] 6313344 blocks level 5, 32k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/3] [UUU]unused devices: none I have Samba 2.05a running, as this machine is intended to be a file server for about a dozen WinNT and Win98 clients. All shares show up to the clients, and all is well until I use my WinNT client and copy files over from the old (NT) server onto the new Linux server. Then I start getting console messages like the following EXT2-fs warning (device md(9,0)): ext2_free_inode: bit already cleared for inode xx I can open, edit, resave, etc. the files on the samba share, apparently without problem, but don't understand the origin or nature (severity) of the above messege. Can anyone help me with this? Bryce Willing Regal Research Mfg. Co. I might mention that the files copied over have _spaces_ in the file names, I'm not sure if it has any bearing on this...
IP Networking Consultant Wanted for stack port
This is not really the correct list for this post, but I feel there are some very knowledgable people on this list, I figure that someone here may very well be qualified or know of someone else who is..Feel free to forward this to someone else if the latter is the case. I am looking for a consultant with Linux Networking experience, specifically ip experience at the driver level. The task is to port the linux ip stack to a z80 based machine. The z80 machine is being programmed in C using a cross compiler called UNIWARE. The z80 operating system is proprietary, and was developed in house by my company. We have, therefore, complete rights and source to it. To apply, please send an email write-up (in plain text, no HTML or attachments) with your relevant experience, outline of the scope of effort you feel is involved, estimate of the cost, and any questions you may have, directly to my email address. Best Regards, Robert Laughlin
Re: PROs and CONs of booting RAID?
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 08:09:29AM -0800, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote: Actually, HP-UX, on HP9000 V-class, has a journaling file system. I've got that only guarantees filesystem metadata integrity, not application data integrity. EMC coming in this afternoon, I'll ask them about the battery backup on the write-back cache. My memory may be fuzzy, but I thought it was an option, on well, my 3430 enclosure has a battery backup unit. you have to wait about 5 mins before it shutdowns completely after you switch it off. Symetrix. I build 99.99+% sites ... that's what I do. well, my job deals with that 0.01-% : Regards, Luca -- Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communications Media Services S.r.l.
Re: [new release] raidreconf utility
You also have to remember that in most LVM implementations adding a device to the
LVM does not add it to the raid.
For example, let's say we have a raid1 array with 2 devices on it, and we have
assigned the array to be part of an LVM. Now, let's say you add a 3rd drive. At
this point you have not added the device to the raid1 array, but only to the lvm
volume group, thusly there will be no redundancy apon the device. LVM+Raid
support comes in handy when you want to clunk together groups of raid arrays. But
bare in mind that it wont necessarily make your life easier .. in putting an LVM
layer over the top of raid you can actually force yourself into greater
restrictions about how you can use the device.
"Oh look .. the 90G raid5 array is getting pretty full .. I guess we should add
more drives to it .. oh .. hold it .. it's a raid5 .. we can't just add more space
to it .. we have to LVM attach another raid5 array to the array in order to keep
redundancy"
The ability to add/remove/resize the lower level raid enviroment would be in my
opinion alot more beneficial in the long run if it is possible.
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 01:56:06PM +0100, Egon Eckert wrote:
There's a new version of the raidreconf utility out. I call it 0.0.2.
Isn't this what supposed 'LVM' to be about? (BTW there seem to be 2
different implementations of LVM on the web -- one included in 0.90 raid
patch and one on http://linux.msede.com/lvm/)
Well, yes and no. LVM gives you pretty much the same features, the ability
to add disks to a device to grow it.
The only reason I started the raidreconf utility was, because I needed to be
able to add/remove disks from RAID arrays *today*. LVM is, from what I can
understand, still not implemented to a state where you can use it and rely
on it. I know I can rely on the RAID code in the kernel, so all I was missing
was a utility to add/remove disks from RAID sets. Now I have one, at least
for RAID-0 :)
While I'm at it, I hope to build in some conversion features too, so that you
can convert between RAID levels. The utility can already convert a single
block device into a RAID-0, but being able to convert a five disk RAID-0 into
eg. a seven disk RAID-5 would be pretty sweet I guess. Remember, this is all
functionality that, once raidreconf works, is perfectly stable and well tested,
because all the ``real'' support for the RAID levels has been in the kernels or
at least the patches for a long time now.
Can someone clarify this?
A few months ago I asked what's the 'translucent' feature as well, but no
reply.. :(
I would actually like to know about the state of LVM, HSM, and all the other
nice storage features being worked on in Linux. I wouldn't want to spend time
on this utility if it was entirely redundant. But then again, I don't think it
is, at this time. Hopefully, in a year or so, nobody will care about
raidreconf, because we have LVM working and providing even more features. Or
maybe some raidreconf code could be used for the LVM for providing the
conversion features.
Time will show:)
--
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
:.: putrid forms of man:
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
:OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.:{Konkhra}...:
--
Mark Ferrell : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(972) 685-7868 : Desk
(972) 685-4210 : Lab
(972) 879-4326 : Pager
Re: New on list and some questions
On Mon, 01 Nov 1999, Francisco Jose Montilla wrote: [Very Good stuff snipped] - and raid level 0 sets for disk2 and disk4, as you don't care about redundancy w/ index files (you can easily recreate them). I don't know if using raid 0 in that machine will give more performance, (although you'll benefit for larger storage capacity coupling those small disks) i'd bet no... just trying to generalise for other potential readers... Yes. Indeed i was trying to make profit of this disk that otherwise are useless (i deal with a 450Mb database) demosntrating to a enterprise that Linux can make use of their of their machines better than its actual server under NT (a 300MHz P][ -92Mb RAM). They accepted the challenge , and i has been working this weekend in the server assembly and tunning. I thinked Linear Raid was the better approach , and RAID-0 second choice. But as i want max perfomace with this limited system , i called advice. By now , i'm winning. System gets a result of 0.1 secs x query in front of the 0.7 that gets the NT. After being parsed by PHP and served by apache , i get 0.5s x query. I have no means to measure the time w/o RAID , simply because the Database does not fit };- (BTW , the NT server uses UW-SCSI...Ho Ho Ho) Next , The Pentium Rebuilding Quest. Shoggoth , The Craputer Master F. Javier Rodríguez Ing. Tec. Telecom. Alcoy , Alicante , Spain
mkraid aborted - device too small??
mkraid fails complaining about the device being too small. Here's the details; Using raidtools-0.50beta3 and 2.0.38 kernel with /etc/raidtab; raiddev /dev/md2 raid-level 1 nr-raid-disks 2 nr-spare-disks 0 chunk-size 128 device /dev/hda8 raid-disk 0 device /dev/hdc8 raid-disk 1 and fdisk -l shows; /dev/hda8 as 514048 blocks /dev/hdc8 as 514048 blocks when I use; mkraid -f /dev/md2 I get; handling MD device /dev/md2 analysing super-block /dev/hda8: device too small (0kB) mkraid aborted Please note I have good reasons to use this combination of kernel and tools and that using exactly the same procedure, md0 and md1 were created with no problems. Any suggestions??? TIA Alex
Re: [new release] raidreconf utility
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 02:16:57PM -0600, Mark Ferrell wrote:
You also have to remember that in most LVM implementations adding a device to the
LVM does not add it to the raid.
[snip]
"Oh look .. the 90G raid5 array is getting pretty full .. I guess we should add
more drives to it .. oh .. hold it .. it's a raid5 .. we can't just add more space
to it .. we have to LVM attach another raid5 array to the array in order to keep
redundancy"
My only experience with LVM is from HPUX. I could create the equivalent of RAID-0
there using LVM only, and it is my understanding that LVM for Linux can do the same.
It should indeed be possible to create the equivalent of RAID-5 as well, using only
LVM. But still the LVM would have to support extending the parity-VG.
raidreconf will hopefully be useful for people to do these tricks, until the LVM
gets the needed features (which may be years ahead).
The ability to add/remove/resize the lower level raid enviroment would be in my
opinion alot more beneficial in the long run if it is possible.
IMHO the support for redundancy should be in the LVM layer. This would eliminate
the need for RAID support as we know it today, because LVM could provide the same
functionality, only even more flexible. But it will take time.
Today, and the day after, we're still going to use the RAID as we know it now. LVM
is inherently cooler, but that doesn't do everyone much good right now as it doesn't
provide the equivalent of a resizable RAID-5. It's my belief that people need that.
Cheers,
--
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
:.: putrid forms of man:
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
:OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.:{Konkhra}...:
Problems moving from debian to RH with RAID
Hi, I have a difficult RAID problem. I was building a system with debian 2.1 using RAID 1 on hdb and hdc (leaving hda for boot). I managed to get the raid working just fine but was having to many problems with Oracle and ColdFusion, so I decided to switch over to RH 6.0 as both products are verified against those releases. Anyway, I switched over to RH6.0 and I can't get the RAID disks t work. I upgraded the kernel to 2.1.15 and compiled in the RAID stuff. And a cat on /proc/mdstat show md0 to md4 are there. When I was using debian the raid commands used mdcreate, mdadd, mdrun, etc. Under RH the comands consist of raidstart, raidstop, etc. Following is what I have done and tried. Created a /etc/raidtab with the following ( I use md0 to md4) # /u01 # NB chunksize and persistent-superblock added for new raid tools raiddev /dev/md0 raid-level 1 nr-raid-disks 2 nr-spare-disks 0 chunk-size 4 persistent-superblock 1 device /dev/hdb3 raid-disk 0 device /dev/hdc3 raid-disk 1 # /u02 etc... Ran: raidstart -a Got: /dev/md0: Invalid argument Ran: mkraid -u /dev/md0 Got: handling MD device /dev/md0 analyzing super-block disk 0: /dev/hdb3, 2097648kB, raid superblock at 2097536kB array needs no upgrade mkraid: aborted Ran: mkraid --really-force /dev/md0 Get: DESTROYING the contents of /dev/md0 in 5 seconds, Ctrl-C if unsure! handling MD device /dev/md0 analyzing super-block disk 0: /dev/hdb3, 2097648kB, raid superblock at 2097536kB disk 1: /dev/hdc3, 2097648kB, raid superblock at 2097536kB mkraid: aborted I have also downloaded the recommended vesion of the raittools 0.50 beta3 and I can't compile then for some reason. Could someone help please. PS. The only problem was having with Oracle was that su under debian was not working properly. Ie: "su - oracle -c dbstart" didn't work as su was not giving me oracle's environment. ColdFusion was the real problem as it wanted versions of libraries that I coldn't find on the debian release an the installation process wouldn't work wih all typed of errors.
Re: [new release] raidreconf utility
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 02:16:57PM -0600, Mark Ferrell wrote:
You also have to remember that in most LVM implementations adding a device to the
LVM does not add it to the raid.
[snip]
"Oh look .. the 90G raid5 array is getting pretty full .. I guess we should add
more drives to it .. oh .. hold it .. it's a raid5 .. we can't just add more space
to it .. we have to LVM attach another raid5 array to the array in order to keep
redundancy"
My only experience with LVM is from HPUX. I could create the equivalent of RAID-0
there using LVM only, and it is my understanding that LVM for Linux can do the same.
It should indeed be possible to create the equivalent of RAID-5 as well, using only
LVM. But still the LVM would have to support extending the parity-VG.
LVM on AIX and HPUX is functionally the same, only in AIX you don't have to buy the
extra SW package to resize the FS while it's mounted. Actually .. they may be derrived
from the same base code .. but I am not certain there.
raidreconf will hopefully be useful for people to do these tricks, until the LVM
gets the needed features (which may be years ahead).
Yah .. AIX supports a method of doing stripping and parity .. but as I understand the
LVM
support is tightly bound to the JFS in order to make this possible. As well, I believe
AIX
no longer supports reducing the size of FS. Actually .. I am not certain it was ever a
'supported' feature .. though I have tools for doing it on AIX3.
The ability to add/remove/resize the lower level raid enviroment would be in my
opinion alot more beneficial in the long run if it is possible.
IMHO the support for redundancy should be in the LVM layer. This would eliminate
the need for RAID support as we know it today, because LVM could provide the same
functionality, only even more flexible. But it will take time.
A single layer approach would deffinately reduce alot of complications.
Today, and the day after, we're still going to use the RAID as we know it now. LVM
is inherently cooler, but that doesn't do everyone much good right now as it doesn't
provide the equivalent of a resizable RAID-5. It's my belief that people need that.
Very much agreed.
Cheers,
--
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
:.: putrid forms of man:
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
:OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.:{Konkhra}...:
--
Mark Ferrell
ide and hot swap
I know this has been covered before but I can't find a searchable archive of this list anywhere. We've got DLT's doing backups right now and we're conceiving that it might be cheaper to setup a system with 2 or 3 linear striped or raid 0 34+gig ide disks and have 2 sets of these disks that we swap out week to week for backups - rather than spend a fortune in DLT tapes and deal with a whopping 4MB/s transfer time. We would be using a set of disks for 4 weeks then swapping out to another set - the other set would be fresh formatted at that point and would be ready to go for the next month's backups. What I'm most interested in is if anyone has seen. 1. external inclosures for ide disks and if there is any hotswap support for ide devices in the kernel. I figure 4 disks across 2 controllers while not an optimum situation would see a HUGE speed boost over DLT drives. And with IDE drive prices dropping like crazy We'd eventually be at a point where the media would almost be cheaper than DLT media. With potential expansion of ide drives into the 100's of gigabyte range this might make a worthwhile effort. any ideas/suggestions. -sv
Re: IP Networking Consultant Wanted for stack port
On Tue, 2 Nov 1999, Robert wrote: This is not really the correct list for this post, but I feel there are some very knowledgable people on this list, I figure that someone here may very well be qualified or know of someone else who is..Feel free to forward this to someone else if the latter is the case. I am looking for a consultant with Linux Networking experience, specifically ip experience at the driver level. The task is to port the linux ip stack to a z80 based machine. The z80 machine is being programmed in C using a cross compiler called UNIWARE. The z80 operating system is proprietary, and was developed in house by my company. We have, therefore, complete rights and source to it. Certainly, but as you have already admitted, your IP stack will be a derivative of the Linux IP stack (which is GPL'd), and therefore any derivative of a GPL'd package must release its source. If this wasn't the case, what is to stop Microsoft from taking the Linux source, 'porting' it to those RISC palmtops (currently running Windows CE) and making it closed source? Sincerely Chris Price
Re(2): Raid1 install / kernel 2.2.5 (Redhat 6.0)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You need to download the raid patch for your kernel... raid0145-19990824-2-2-11.bz2 for 2.2.11/12/13 kernels. The kernels ship supporting raidtools 0.42.. Thanks David. I'm now well aware of this. I've found a patch for kernel 2.2.5-15 and raidtools 0.90 in the RedHat 6.0 distribution, it comes in the kernel sources rpm package I hope my problems will soon be over. Marc - Marc Barrot Directeur technique DIG [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.dig.fr --
Re: Root RAID and unmounting /boot
Marcos Lopez wrote: I am attempting to get my system to run RAID 1 for /, /usr, /var, /home I have moved over all except for / and it works fine. After reading the howto "Root file system on RAID. by - Jakob OEstergaard" I have decided to take the first approach, unfortunately I can not umount \boot. even after performing a umount -f \boot. I also performed a lsof | grep /boot to see what was being used and it returned the following. syslogd 378 root5w REG9,18548 192396 /var/log/boot.log klogd 389 root2r REG8,1 191102 12 /boot/System.map-2.2.12-20 Is it safe to kill these? Better add cd / to the rc script that starts them so they don't block /boot. Regards, Joey -- Never trust an operating system you don't have source for! Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.
RAID5 BG RECONSTRUCTION EATS MEMMORY
Hi, i have a very very very big problem with my current raid setup and i don't know any further tricks to try.. I have an raid5 setup with an Adaptec 2940UW, 5 disks, kernel 2.2.5, raidtools 0.9 yesterday my system crashed and after booting the system trys to reconstruct the raid in the background as usual in those situations. Only one thing is different: the reconstructions eats about 100K per second and without any limit. It takes about 4 hours until all memmory is eaten up an than the system crashes!! no swap is used... the system is an 2x PI-200MMX SMP with 256 MByte RAM? Is there something i can do / check / setup / ??? Thanks a lot!! bye marc _ I n t e g r a t e d D i g i t a l N e t w o r k T e c h n o l o g i e s Perchstätten 16 - 35428 Langgöns - GermanyPhone +49 (06403) 9526 - 0 Fax +49 (06403) 9526 - 33 Marcus Zoller [EMAIL PROTECTED] http: w w w . i d n t . d e _
