My other concern is what happens when one drive goes down if we use
gmirror? Is it completelly transparent
and bad drive can be hot swapped while server is running and rebuild
started?
I am thinking now about gpt+gmirror (including boot and swap)
Artem
Yes. In fact, you can test this by
30.01.2013 1:01, Warren Block:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT
and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's
possible to
On 01/28/13 21:43, Artem Kuchin wrote:
I am planning to use mirror configuration of two SATA 7200rpm 2TB disks.
I personally vote for gmirror in this case; I've used it a lot and found
it very good wrt to both performance and robustness.
You can spend the extra money you spare on the
30.01.2013 18:06, Warren Block:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
30.01.2013 1:01, Warren Block:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT
On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:10 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote:
You can spend the extra money you spare on the controller buying good disks;
as someone else pointed out don't get desktop-class ones, but 24x7 ones.
Server Class drives buy you some improvement, but my recent experience with
Seagate
There seems to be one more advantage to gmirror
If i understood correctly
gmirror label -v -b split -s 2048 data da0 da1 da2
will create a tripple mirror raid 1, that is
triple redundancy, which is hardly available on any hardware raid.
Am i correct here?
Also, does anyone know how to choose
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
30.01.2013 18:06, Warren Block:
GPT partitions should work, just limit it to one mirrored partition per
drive.
Please, clarify what you mean here.
If only one GPT partition on a drive is mirrored with another GPT partition
on another drive, head
On Jan 30, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Warren Block wrote:
If you want to use the same drive for booting, it's possible. Create all
three partitions on both drives manually. Then mirror the freebsd-ufs
partition only. The contents of the freebsd-boot partition don't change
often, and swap does
, but if first disk is brain damaged then bios
may just stuck
trying to boot from it and will not pass boot attempt to the second
disk. I don't know, it depends on bios of course. But this seems to be a
disadvantage to
a software raid.
Artem
___
freebsd
, but if first disk is brain
damaged then bios may just stuck trying to boot from it and will not
pass boot attempt to the second disk. I don't know, it depends on bios
of course. But this seems to be a disadvantage to a software raid.
That's true. The similar situation with hardware RAID is when
29.01.2013 11:54, Michael Powell:
Artem Kuchin wrote:
I guess what I'm trying to point out is that low performance wrt software
RAID will stem from other things besides just simply consuming a few CPU
cycles. Today's CPUs have the cycles to spare. I've been using gmirror for
RAID 1 mirrors
. I hope
to see the same on a software raid.
The controller would be a slight concern. But for what you've described
doing I doubt it will be a big deal. The 3Ware may have a faster processor
on it than say a generic onboard built-in. But since all we're talking here
is a RAID 1 mirror my guess
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
My other concern is what happens when one drive goes down if we use gmirror?
Is it completelly transparent
and bad drive can be hot swapped while server is running and rebuild started?
I am thinking now about gpt+gmirror (including boot and swap)
As
29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and
GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to
mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one
partition
thrash the
heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously.
http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html
Why isn't gmirror more intelligent? I hate to use Linux as an example, but
mdadm won't simultaneously rebuild multiple RAID sets if they use the same
physical
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block:
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote:
The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM
metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT
partitions, but be aware
Hello!
I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server.
The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good
options they do not
provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for
freebsd.
The server base conf is 8core 32gb ram 2.8+ ghz.
So, maybe
On 01/28/13 21:43, Artem Kuchin wrote:
Hello!
I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server.
The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good
options they do not
provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for
freebsd.
The server base
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Per olof Ljungmark wrote:
On 01/28/13 21:43, Artem Kuchin wrote:
Hello!
I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server.
The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good
options they do not
provide hardware raid or even if they do
On Jan 28, 2013, at 3:43 PM, Artem Kuchin wrote:
I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server.
The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good options
they do not
provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for
freebsd.
I prefer SW
Artem Kuchin wrote:
Hello!
I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server.
The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good
options they do not
provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for
freebsd.
The server base conf is 8core
raidz is available for Freebsd through the file system format ZFS
and is similar to RAID-5.
Is that in FreeBSD 7.0 Production release?
But there is also RAID-Z2 which uses two forms of parity to achieve
results similar to RAID6: the ability to sustain up to two drive
failures without losing
On Mon, May 28, 2007 at 12:11:24AM +0200, Gabriel Rossetti wrote:
Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:07:58AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/05/07, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of kalin mintchev
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 4:11 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: raid or not raid
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:30:06AM -0400, kalin mintchev
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of kalin mintchev
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 4:11 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: raid or not raid
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:30:06AM -0400, kalin mintchev
-Original Message-
From: kalin mintchev [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2007 5:04 AM
To: Ted Mittelstaedt
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: raid or not raid
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
Jerry McAllister wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:07:58AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/05/07, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims
On Thu, 24 May 2007 19:11:27 -0400 (EDT)
kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unless at device 31.2 on pci0 points to some RAID evidence - which i
think it's false - than i read this as the ad6 disk sits there unused.
am i right?!
FWIW, you can use gstat (as root) to see if a certain
how come there is ad4s1b and ad4s1c when those names don't appear in the
fstab or df?
Very often ad4s1b will be the swap and ad4s1c the full slice.
That is not an absolute rule, but it is very much recommended (at
least for ad4s1c) to keep it equivalent to the full slice.
Olivier
how come there is ad4s1b and ad4s1c when those names don't appear in the
fstab or df?
Very often ad4s1b will be the swap and ad4s1c the full slice.
That is not an absolute rule, but it is very much recommended (at
least for ad4s1c) to keep it equivalent to the full slice.
but there is
On Fri, 25 May 2007 15:41:28 +0700 (ICT)
Olivier Nicole [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
how come there is ad4s1b and ad4s1c when those names don't appear in the
fstab or df?
because df shows mounted disks, and fstab what to mount. neither of them affect
b (usually swap) or c (as per Olivier
On Fri, 25 May 2007 04:37:25 -0400 (EDT)
kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
replying to your email down the thread...but using this content...
L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
0 6 66278.5 0 00.05.0| ad4
The actual
On Fri, 25 May 2007 04:37:25 -0400 (EDT)
kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
replying to your email down the thread...but using this content...
L(q) ops/sr/s kBps ms/rw/s kBps ms/w %busy Name
0 6 66278.5 0 00.05.0| ad4
The
in slice 1 of disk ad4.
They all get used (from the GEOM POV) when , for example, userland
access the fs located in ad4s1g .
clear as mud? ;)
Not having played with RAID here, gstat was useful news, ta, especially
as vmstat iostat don't show acd0 anymore .. however I'm a bit puzzled
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a bunch of
slices.
under devices there is another name - ad6 - but it's
On 24/05/07, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a bunch of
slices.
under
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/05/07, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the
machine has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc
with one big slice and
different partitions
they insist there are 2 raided discs in tha machine. the os is 5.4 and
i
think at that point the raid drivers were still considered
'experimental'.
it makes sense to me that if i don't see a second drive in the fstab
there
isn;t any
Also what type of RAID? If it's Hardware RAID _and_ it's using a 3ware
card,
doubt it. i don't see anything that ponts to that in the pciconf output..
you can install tw_cli from /usr/ports/sysutils. It's a nice
little utility and will show you the status of your units/ports/drives
At 05:30 AM 5/24/2007, kalin mintchev wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a bunch of
slices.
under devices
anywhere.
the one i see both in df and the fstab is ad4 with one big slice and
different partitions
they insist there are 2 raided discs in tha machine. the os is 5.4 and
i
think at that point the raid drivers were still considered
'experimental'.
it makes sense to me that if i don't
On 24/05/07, Derek Ragona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 05:30 AM 5/24/2007, kalin mintchev wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:30:06AM -0400, kalin mintchev wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a bunch
On 24/05/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/05/07, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
please elaborate. do you mean that the raided disks will have another
id/name rather than 'ad'?
Not knowing what hardware you have, I would still hazard
that a RAID device
On Thursday 24 May 2007 06:30:06 am kalin mintchev wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine
has two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a
bunch of slices
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:07:58AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 24/05/07, kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine
has
two discs
On Thu, 24 May 2007, kalin mintchev wrote:
Also what type of RAID? If it's Hardware RAID _and_ it's using a 3ware
card,
doubt it. i don't see anything that ponts to that in the pciconf output..
you can install tw_cli from /usr/ports/sysutils. It's a nice
little utility and will show you
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:30:06AM -0400, kalin mintchev wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine
has
two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a
bunch
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 07:11:27PM -0400, kalin mintchev wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:30:06AM -0400, kalin mintchev wrote:
so nobody on this list knows anything about raid?
wrong list?
hi all..
i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that the machine
has
On Thu, 24 May 2007 19:11:27 -0400 (EDT)
kalin mintchev [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
unless at device 31.2 on pci0 points to some RAID evidence - which i
think it's false - than i read this as the ad6 disk sits there unused.
am i right?!
FWIW, you can use gstat (as root) to see if a certain geom
big slice and
different partitions
they insist there are 2 raided discs in tha machine. the os is 5.4 and i
think at that point the raid drivers were still considered 'experimental'.
it makes sense to me that if i don't see a second drive in the fstab there
isn;t any mounting which means
51 matches
Mail list logo
