On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 03:14:14PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
It is very unlikely to have a positive effect.
Well, at least one - we can simplify the incremental check
script drastically.
If it has any effect, it will significantly slow down any check/repair etc
that is happening.
I
On Wed, 25 Dec 2013 19:13:27 +0400 Sergey B Kirpichev skirpic...@gmail.com
wrote:
The main issue which all proposed solutions share is when
there's a large array, say, md0, and a small array, say,
md1, both shares the same set of underlying disks, so md
subystem will not check/repair them
The main issue which all proposed solutions share is when
there's a large array, say, md0, and a small array, say,
md1, both shares the same set of underlying disks, so md
subystem will not check/repair them in parallel. In this
situation, we will never check md1 if checking md0 takes
more
Ok. I reviewed the patches and proposed solutions, but
I can't commit/implement any of them so far.
The main issue which all proposed solutions share is when
there's a large array, say, md0, and a small array, say,
md1, both shares the same set of underlying disks, so md
subystem will not
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 07:51:27PM +0300, Michael Tokarev wrote:
The main issue which all proposed solutions share is when
there's a large array, say, md0, and a small array, say,
md1, both shares the same set of underlying disks, so md
subystem will not check/repair them in parallel. In this
Just to note, the above patch wont work properly on squeeze kernel (That
is why you may need here black magick with watching sync_completed
file, as Alice suggests).
This is fixed in kernel since the commit:
Attached slightly fixed version of the above
patch: sync_min must be a multiple of chunk_size.
checkarray.patch
Description: Binary data
tag 556610 +patch
thanks
Just a more simple version of the
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?msg=32;filename=checkarray.diff;att=2;bug=556610
Rough idea is to
1) setup crontab on a regular basis, e.g. weekly:
--8---
57 0 * * 0 root [ -x /usr/share/mdadm/checkarray ]
also sprach Goswin von Brederlow goswin-...@web.de [2009.11.17.0558 +0100]:
Neil Brown recently explained on the linux-raid ML that one can do
partial checks on a raid array:
| If you first read from 'sync_completed' and store that value,
| then before starting a new 'check', write the value
Package: mdadm
Version: 3.0-2
Severity: wishlist
Hi,
Neil Brown recently explained on the linux-raid ML that one can do
partial checks on a raid array:
| If you first read from 'sync_completed' and store that value,
| then before starting a new 'check', write the value to
| sync_max, then you
10 matches
Mail list logo
