Alexandre Oliva wrote:
On Aug 1, 2006, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I rarely think you are totally wrong about anything RAID, but I do
believe you have missed the point of autodetect. It is intended to
work as it does now, building the array without depending on some user
level fun
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 06:32:33PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Sure enough the LVM subsystem could make things better for one to not
need all of the PVs in the root-containing VG in order to be able to
mount root read-write, or at all, but if you think about it, if initrd
it shouldn't need all
On Tue, Aug 01, 2006 at 05:46:38PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
Using the mkinitrd patch that I posted before, the result was that
mdadm did try to bring up all raid devices but, because the raid456
module was not loaded in initrd, the raid devices were left inactive.
probably your initrd is b
On Aug 1, 2006, Bill Davidsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I rarely think you are totally wrong about anything RAID, but I do
> believe you have missed the point of autodetect. It is intended to
> work as it does now, building the array without depending on some user
> level functionality.
Well,
On Aug 1, 2006, Michael Tokarev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> []
>> If mdadm can indeed scan all partitions to bring up all raid devices
>> in them, like nash's raidautorun does, great. I'll give that a try,
> Never, ever, try to do that (again). Mdadm (or vgscan, or wh
On Aug 1, 2006, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I'll give it a try some time tomorrow, since I won't turn on that
>> noisy box today any more; my daughter is already asleep :-)
> But then, I could use my own desktop to test it :-)
But then, I wouldn't be testing quite the same sce
Neil Brown wrote:
[linux-raid added to cc.
Background: patch was submitted to remove the current hard limit
of 127 partitions that can be auto-detected - limit set by
'detected_devices array in md.c.
]
My first inclination is not to fix this problem.
I consider md auto-detect to be a legacy
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
[]
> If mdadm can indeed scan all partitions to bring up all raid devices
> in them, like nash's raidautorun does, great. I'll give that a try,
Never, ever, try to do that (again). Mdadm (or vgscan, or whatever)
should NOT assemble ALL arrays found, but only those which it
On Jul 31, 2006, Alexandre Oliva <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> mdadm --assemble --scan --homehost='' --auto-update-homehost \
>> --auto=yes --run
>> in your initrd, having set the hostname correctly first. It might do
>> exactly what you want.
> I'll give it a try some time tomorrow, since I wo
On Jul 31, 2006, Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The initrd need to 'know' how to find the root filesystem, whether by
> devnum or uuid or whatever.
Yeah, the tricky bit is the `whatever' alternative, when / is a
logical volume, and you need to bring up all of the physical volumes
in orde
On Jul 31, 2006, David Greaves <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> in the initrd image, since then any reconfiguration requires the info
>> to be introduced in the initrd image before the machine goes down.
>> Sometimes, especially in case of disk failures, you just can't do
>>
On Monday July 31, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2006, Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > 1/
> > It just isn't "right". We don't mount filesystems from partitions
> > just because they have type 'Linux'. We don't enable swap on
> > partitions just because they have
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 30, 2006, Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> 1/
>> It just isn't "right". We don't mount filesystems from partitions
>> just because they have type 'Linux'. We don't enable swap on
>> partitions just because they have type 'Linux swap'. So wh
On Jul 30, 2006, Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 1/
> It just isn't "right". We don't mount filesystems from partitions
> just because they have type 'Linux'. We don't enable swap on
> partitions just because they have type 'Linux swap'. So why do we
> assemble md/raid
On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 09:20:58AM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
>
> My first inclination is not to fix this problem.
>
> I consider md auto-detect to be a legacy feature.
> I don't use it and I recommend that other people don't use it.
> However I cannot justify removing it, so it stays there.
> Havi
[linux-raid added to cc.
Background: patch was submitted to remove the current hard limit
of 127 partitions that can be auto-detected - limit set by
'detected_devices array in md.c.
]
My first inclination is not to fix this problem.
I consider md auto-detect to be a legacy feature.
I don't u
16 matches
Mail list logo
