Re: Possible data corruption sata_sil24?

2007-07-19 Thread Tejun Heo
David Shaw wrote: I'm not sure whether this is problem of sata_sil24 or dm layer. Cc'ing linux-raid for help. How much memory do you have? One big difference between ata_piix and sata_sil24 is that sil24 can handle 64bit DMA. Maybe dma mapping or something interacts weirdly with dm there?

Re: asynchronous write

2007-07-19 Thread Neil Brown
On Wednesday July 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did the asynchronous write stuff (as it was in fr1) ever get into kernel software raid? Hmmm... what was 'fr1' again??.. asks google. http://www.it.uc3m.es/ptb/fr1/ Yes, that sound like the 'bitmap' support currently in md. The bitmap is stored

Re: Slow Soft-RAID 5 performance

2007-07-19 Thread Lars Schimmer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Justin Piszcz wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Rui Santos wrote: Hi, I'm getting a strange slow performance behavior on a recently installed Server. Here are the details: Server: Asus AS-TS500-E4A Board: Asus DSBV-D (

2.6.19-rc5: Can't get built-in raid support, modular works correctly

2007-07-19 Thread J. Hart
When I configure a 2.6.19-rc5 linux kernel for built-in raid support, I do not get the expected /proc/mdstat entry. I set the following kernel parameters for this : CONFIG_MD=Y BLK_DEV_MD=y MD_RAID0=y When I configure the kernel for modular raid support in otherwise identical fashion, I do

Re: Slow Soft-RAID 5 performance

2007-07-19 Thread Justin Piszcz
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007, Lars Schimmer wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Justin Piszcz wrote: On Wed, 18 Jul 2007, Rui Santos wrote: Hi, I'm getting a strange slow performance behavior on a recently installed Server. Here are the details: Server: Asus AS-TS500-E4A

Re: pata_via with software raid1: attempt to access beyond end of device

2007-07-19 Thread Dâniel Fraga
On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:54:50 +1000 Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The resierfs filesystem is trying to access beyond the end of the raid1 array. Maybe some indexing information in the array is corrupted. Did you recreate the array (mdadm --create) after changing to the new drivers? If

Re: pata_via with software raid1: attempt to access beyond end of device

2007-07-19 Thread Neil Brown
On Thursday July 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:54:50 +1000 Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The resierfs filesystem is trying to access beyond the end of the raid1 array. Maybe some indexing information in the array is corrupted. Did you recreate the array

Re: pata_via with software raid1: attempt to access beyond end of device

2007-07-19 Thread Dâniel Fraga
On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:14:31 +1000 Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What does od -D -j 65536 -N 4 /dev/md1 show. This is the size the reiserfs thinks it is using. Multiply by 4 and you should get 77642048 or maybe a little less. If you get more, then reiserfs think the device is

Re: pata_via with software raid1: attempt to access beyond end of device

2007-07-19 Thread Neil Brown
On Thursday July 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 12:14:31 +1000 Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What does od -D -j 65536 -N 4 /dev/md1 show. This is the size the reiserfs thinks it is using. Multiply by 4 and you should get 77642048 or maybe a little less.

[RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread Al Boldi
As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but at least the first 100MB are gone. I can probably live without the first partion, but there are many partitions after that, which I hope should

Re: [RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread Dave Young
On 7/20/07, Al Boldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but /dev/null ? at least the first 100MB are gone. I can probably live without the first partion, but

Re: [RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread James Lamanna
On 7/19/07, Al Boldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but at least the first 100MB are gone. I can probably live without the first partion, but there are many

Re: [RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread Jeffrey V. Merkey
Al Boldi wrote: As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but at least the first 100MB are gone. I can probably live without the first partion, but there are many partitions after that,

Re: [RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread Dave Young
On 7/20/07, Willy Tarreau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 08:13:03AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote: As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but at least the first 100MB are gone.

Re: [RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread Willy Tarreau
On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 08:13:03AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote: As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but at least the first 100MB are gone. I can probably live without the first partion,

Re: [RFH] Partion table recovery

2007-07-19 Thread Dave Young
On 7/20/07, Dave Young [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 7/20/07, Al Boldi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but /dev/null ? withdraw my wrong comment. at least