- Message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:50:09 +0200
From: Nagilum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Nagilum [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help RAID5 reshape Oops / backup-file
To: Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
-
Dear all,
This is hopefully a simple question for you to answer, but I am fairly
new to RAID and don't want to risk losing my data!
My setup is as follows:
- I have four 500GB disks. Each disk is split into a 5GB partition, and
a 495GB partition.
- The four 5GB partitions are in a RAID-5
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Hello,
I run 2.6.23 linux kernel on two T1000 (sparc64) servers. Each
server has a partitionable raid5 array (/dev/md/d0) and I have to
synchronize both raid5 volumes by raid1. Thus, I have tried to build a
raid1 volume between /dev/md/d0p1 and /dev/sdi1
mdadm 2.4.1 through 2.5.6 works. mdadm-2.6's Improve allocation and
use of space for bitmaps in version1 metadata
(199171a297a87d7696b6b8c07ee520363f4603c1) would seem like the
offending change. Using 1.2 metdata works.
I get the following using the tip of the mdadm git repo or any other
version
On 10/17/07, Dan Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/17/07, BERTRAND Joël [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Hello,
I run 2.6.23 linux kernel on two T1000 (sparc64) servers. Each
server has a partitionable raid5 array (/dev/md/d0) and I have to
synchronize
Dan Williams wrote:
On 10/17/07, BERTRAND Joël [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Hello,
I run 2.6.23 linux kernel on two T1000 (sparc64) servers. Each
server has a partitionable raid5 array (/dev/md/d0) and I have to
synchronize both raid5 volumes by raid1. Thus, I have
Dan Williams wrote:
On 10/17/07, Dan Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/17/07, BERTRAND Joël [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Hello,
I run 2.6.23 linux kernel on two T1000 (sparc64) servers. Each
server has a partitionable raid5 array (/dev/md/d0) and I have to
Hello Dan, hello Neil,
thanks for your help!
On Tuesday 16 October 2007 19:31:08 Dan Williams wrote:
On Mon, 2007-10-15 at 08:03 -0700, Bernd Schubert wrote:
Hi,
in order to tune raid performance I did some benchmarks with and
without the
stripe queue patches. 2.6.22 is only for
Jonathan Gazeley wrote:
Dear all,
This is hopefully a simple question for you to answer, but I am fairly
new to RAID and don't want to risk losing my data!
My setup is as follows:
- I have four 500GB disks. Each disk is split into a 5GB partition,
and a 495GB partition.
- The four 5GB
Mike Snitzer wrote:
mdadm 2.4.1 through 2.5.6 works. mdadm-2.6's Improve allocation and
use of space for bitmaps in version1 metadata
(199171a297a87d7696b6b8c07ee520363f4603c1) would seem like the
offending change. Using 1.2 metdata works.
I get the following using the tip of the mdadm git
On 10/17/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Snitzer wrote:
mdadm 2.4.1 through 2.5.6 works. mdadm-2.6's Improve allocation and
use of space for bitmaps in version1 metadata
(199171a297a87d7696b6b8c07ee520363f4603c1) would seem like the
offending change. Using 1.2 metdata
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 17:57 -0400, Mike Accetta wrote:
Was the disk driver generating any low level errors or otherwise
indicating that it might be retrying operations on the bad drive at
the time (i.e. console diagnostics)? As Neil mentioned later, the md layer
is at the mercy of the low
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 09:44 -0700, BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Dan,
I have modified get_stripe_work like this :
static unsigned long get_stripe_work(struct stripe_head *sh)
{
unsigned long pending;
int ack = 0;
int a,b,c,d,e,f,g;
pending =
On Wednesday October 17, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
mdadm 2.4.1 through 2.5.6 works. mdadm-2.6's Improve allocation and
use of space for bitmaps in version1 metadata
(199171a297a87d7696b6b8c07ee520363f4603c1) would seem like the
offending change. Using 1.2 metdata works.
I get the following
14 matches
Mail list logo
