David Grimes wrote:
I'm sorry but I do not know how to apply this patch.. when I do #patch
raidreconf-0.0.2.patch
It just sits there... can u tell me how ya'll made did it? Thank you in
advance.
Did you type "patch raidreconf-0.0.2.patch" ?
---^^^
btw. what is this patch
Hi,
I'm sorry but I do not know how to apply this patch.. when I do #patch
raidreconf-0.0.2.patch
It just sits there... can u tell me how ya'll made did it? Thank you in
advance.
Did you type "patch raidreconf-0.0.2.patch" ?
---^^^
btw. what is this patch for and
can u send your raid configuration file(s)? maybe, I will be able to help
then...
-Original Message-
From: Sandro Dentella [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 2:23 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: help: read-ahead not set: what is it???
Hi,
I'm
Leblanc
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: HELP with autodetection on booting
[Gregory Leblanc]
I started seeing this when I blew away my RAID0 arrays and put RAID1 arrays
on my home machine. I suspect that this is cause by RedHat putting
something in the initscripts to start the RAID
On Mon, 29 May 2000, James Manning wrote:
Sure makes it look like hdc3 has some major issues. It has a partition
type of fd, but invalid raid superblock. Makes me wonder if e2fsck
didn't get run on hdc3 itself and it "fixed" that last part (hope not
since it may have done some real
the disk ordering in /etc/raidtab or have had to
raidhotremove/raidhotadd any disks THEN it will destroy your data.
- Original Message -
From: "Matthew Burke" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "James Manning" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000
: "Matthew Burke" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "James Manning" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: HELP!!! Broken raid0
On Mon, 29 May 2000, James Manning wrote:
Sure makes it look like hdc3 has some m
I started seeing this when I blew away my RAID0 arrays and put RAID1 arrays
on my home machine. I suspect that this is cause by RedHat putting
something in the initscripts to start the RAID arrays AND the RAID slices
being set to type fd (RAID autodetect), but I haven't been able to confirm
[Jieming Wang]
autorun ...
considering sdb1 ...
adding sdb1 ...
adding sda1 ...
created md0
bindsda1,1
bindsdb1,2
running: sdb1sda1
now!
sdb1's event counter: 000a
sda1's event counter: 000a
Looks like a couple of partitions with type fd, looking great for
autostart by the
[Gregory Leblanc]
I started seeing this when I blew away my RAID0 arrays and put RAID1 arrays
on my home machine. I suspect that this is cause by RedHat putting
something in the initscripts to start the RAID arrays AND the RAID slices
being set to type fd (RAID autodetect), but I haven't
[Matthew Burke]
e2fsck 1.18, 11-nov-1999 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
e2fsck: Attempt to read block from filesystem resulted in short read while
trying to open /dev/md1
Could this be a zero-length partition?
/dev/md1 is not mounted, but it is properly set up in /etc/raidtab
raidstart
[Matthew Burke]
On Sun, 28 May 2000, James Manning wrote:
[Matthew Burke]
e2fsck 1.18, 11-nov-1999 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
e2fsck: Attempt to read block from filesystem resulted in short read while
trying to open /dev/md1
Could this be a zero-length partition?
mdstat:
Your logs indicate that the Raid code decided to look at hdh2 as gospel and
dismiss all of the rest. The easiest solution is to temporarily disconnect
or disable hdh2, then restart the system. It will accept the data on all of
the other drives as OK now and start up the array in "degraded" mode
Hi there,
On Thu, 18 May 2000, Richard Bollinger wrote:
May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdh2's event counter: 000a
May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdg2's event counter: 0008
May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdf2's event counter: 0008
May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hde2's event
-Original Message-
From: Edward Schernau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 11:19 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: help interpret tiobench.pl results?
I get:
File Block Num Seq ReadRand Read Seq Write Rand
Write
DirSize Size
Volker Wysk wrote:
Hello!
RedHat 6.1's graphical install program has destroyed my RAID0 volume,
which is really bad for me.
I was going to install a second Linux, on a separate partition, and chose
"create RAID partition", and to *not* format it. After that, I couldn't
mount it any
Erich wrote:
Any clues? I feel like I've done everything according to the
instructions, and I feel like I'm very close to getting it to work,
but it's still not working. Have I left out something important in
the kernel config? Or did I need a RAID patch to the 2.2.14 kernel to
get it
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Tony Grant wrote:
Erich wrote:
Any clues? I feel like I've done everything according to the
instructions, and I feel like I'm very close to getting it to work,
but it's still not working. Have I left out something important in
the kernel config? Or did I
I'm the one who originally posted the question, and now I may have an
answer (with help from the list):
I've tried doing that, 2.2.14 adding both patchs.
mostly they failed everywhere. then once I did it get it in, and compile,
it still never worked right, I change to 2.3 kernel, even tho
It's definitely possible to use 2.2.14 with the Software RAID patch
and with the Promise Ultra/66 patch at the same time. I'm doing it
right now. Download the plain-vanilla 2.2.14 kernel. Apply this
patch first:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hedrick/old/ide.2.2.14
Ok, here are the notes that I wrote to myself of how to get Software
RAID and the Promise Ultra/66 in the same kernel:
1. Don't use the RedHat version of the 2.2.14 kernel. It has
too many patches, so the other patches won't work.
2. Do unpack the linux-2.2.14.tar.gz file.
3. Apply the
Erich,
I am planning on trying to use the Promise Ultra66 tonight (want to beef
up performance). I currently have RAID5 running with a Promise
EIDE-MaxII card quite nicely. I know about the 2.2.14-B1 patch for
RAID, but which promise patch are you referring to? I see that Promise
has a beta
Title: RE: help, help, help
Here is the main clue as to what is wrong **
#cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [1 linear] [2 raid0] [3 raid1]
read_ahead not set
md0 : inactive
md1 : inactive
md2 : inactive
md3 : inactive
Any time you see a /proc/mdstat listing md0 through md3
With the boot disk, if it pauses and asks for parameters you can state
"root=/dev/sdb1" after you copy everything over. Once booted, copy it back
to the new drive and all should be well.
At 05:39 PM 12/20/1999 +0200, Simo Varis wrote:
I got nice suprise, a disk on old (0.36.6) RAID1 array is
Thanks for the clear explanation. I gave it a try, but it didn't
work. It may be because I used the 'old' raid as compiled into the
standard 2.2.13 kernel.
That'll be exactly why. Don't use the old RAID code unless you have a good
reason to.
I've been very confused by the various raid
docs
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 11:09:18PM +, Lyndon David wrote:
I am just setting up a system and have put in two identical disks as hda and hdc.
fdisk
sees hda as having 255 heads and 63 sectors but hdc as having 16 heads and 63
sectors !
in addition to what has been said try zeroing the
Hi,
i had the same problem and i found the following solution:
try to delete or set the "dos compatibility flag" on both drives.
You have to do this with fdisks c command.
For mee it looks as if one of your drives has this flag set and the another not.
I hope this helps
Bruno Prior wrote on 3/12/99 9:39:
This is a little unorthodox,
but try the following
Thanks for the clear explanation. I gave it a try, but it didn't work. It may be
because I used the 'old' raid as compiled into the standard 2.2.13 kernel. I've been
very confused by the various raid docs
I had _exactly_ the same problem. The only way I found around it was to
go into the BIOS and manually set both disks to NORMAL instead of LBA.
Attempting to set both to LBA didn't work. This is with RedHat 6.0 with
the 2.2.5-22 kernel. Perhaps this is fixed in a later kernel?
--
Stephen
Check your bios settings.. See if one is in LBA mode,etc..
Just ask you bios to autodetect the drives.
I believe the bios has three ways of accessing drives.. each way makes the harddrive
report different heads/sectors/etc.
David Robinson.
Lyndon David wrote:
Hi,
I am in a bit of a
I had exactly the same experience with 2.2.13ac3 kernel, only setting disks to
NORMAL made fdisk to see them as two identical disks.
Does this influence the speed of disks in any way ?
On pi±, 10 gru 1999, Stephen Walton wrote:
I had _exactly_ the same problem. The only way I found around it
]]On Behalf Of David Cunningham
Sent: 03 December 1999 02:26
To: Jim Ford; linux-raid
Subject: Re: Help on root fs using raid-0
I've done this on raid-1. I assume the procedure for raid-0 will be the
same. Here is how I do it. I'm not guaranteeing this is the best way:
First I'll make
I've done this on raid-1. I assume the procedure for raid-0 will be the
same. Here is how I do it. I'm not guaranteeing this is the best way:
First I'll make some assumptions. First you would like to boot to your root
md0 filesystem. Second, you have a kernel that is new enough to support
Drenning Bruce wrote:
I've set up a couple of red hat 6.1 servers. All partitions are mirrored
except /boot. I re-compiled the kernel to include the SCSI driver RAID1
personality. I have not been able to create a working rescue procedure.
Following red hat's new procedure - boot from the
Ingo Molnar wrote:
chunksize does have an important meaning in the linear case: it's
'rounding'. We cannot change this unilaterally (it breaks backwards
What is "rounding" mean in the linear case? Is this the rounding of each partition
that is part of the MD drive?
compatibility), and it
On Fri, Nov 26, 1999 at 09:43:06AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hallo,
I have a Sparc 10 with Linux6.1 running I have two disks of 1Gb and
1.7Gb.
I would like to do a linear raid but when I do "raidstart -a /dev/md0
into shell I receive - /dev/md0: Invalid argument -
and into
chunksize does have an important meaning in the linear case: it's
'rounding'. We cannot change this unilaterally (it breaks backwards
compatibility), and it does make sense i believe. [certain disks serve
requests faster which have proper alignment and size. I do not think we
should assume that
James,
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 08:26:19 -0800 (PST), Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
I vote for maintaining the Doc's , [...]
And do you volunteer to? :-)
Regards,
Robert
Chris,
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 21:40:37 +0100, KS wrote:
We just had some memory added in our server that is on some remote location.
The guy also switched the disks that were in the raid1.
He connected them to wrong cables, when he realised that sth is wrong,
he connected them like before and as
Thanks to James suggestion, I reviewed the messages file and found that
md.c was complaining that there was no chunk size (seems like a bug
since linear layouts shouldn't require this parameter). When I added
"chunk-size 4" to /etc/raidtab for /dev/md1, I was able to get a linear
/dev/md1
On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, John Finlay wrote:
Encouraged by this result, I foolishly went ahead and remade a linear
Not blatantly foolish at all - fs corruption has been a tricky problem
with 2.2.
/dev/md1 using the two 36GB drives (except for 2GB in /dev/hda1 for /) -
32GB in /dev/hda4 and 34GB
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 01:39:14PM +0800, Next Liu wrote:
Dear Sir:
This Email come from Taiwan. We have used the Mandrake 6.1 OS to
install
software-RAID. As before, we used three 8.4G HD as RAID-0 was OK. But
now
we supportted larger HD - 13.0G x 3 as RAID-0. While we use "mkraid"
I have a Sparc 10 with Linux6.0 running. I have four disks da 1.7Gb.
Linux 6.0 did i miss something, last time i checked it was
around 2.3.20 and that wasn't 10 years ago.
My kernel is 2.2.5-15 and raidtools-0.90
If I do mkraid /dev/md0 I receive - handling MD device /dev/md0
[ Saturday, October 30, 1999 ] John Finlay wrote:
raiddev /dev/md1
raid-level linear
nr-raid-disks 2
persistent-superblock 0
device /dev/hdb1
raid-disk 0
device /dev/hdb2
raid-disk 1
Only thing I could think of is use /dev/md0 instead of md1 (unless
I'm sorry this is a bit off-topic, but large raid sets need big backups ;-)
My HP SureStore DAT24 stops after writing 12 GB of data to a DDS-3 tape. I
suspect there must be something wrong with the compression. To verify this I
need some additional information:
How are you decicing
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
Now that someone has started this thread :)
Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
there?
Do you mean "industrial strenght" or "industrial GUI"? :)
I got my quote for arkeia
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
Hi,
Here is the output of df -k:
Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
/dev/md0 5916736 811879 4798422 14% /
/dev/md1 3106031 41673 2903712 1% /var
/dev/sda1
Francisco Jose Montilla wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
Hi,
Here is the output of df -k:
Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
/dev/md0 5916736 811879 4798422 14% /
/dev/md1 3106031 41673
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Now that someone has started this thread :)
Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
there?
I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my budget.
Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes
I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my budget.
Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes killed it for me.
What do you mean by append? As I said on a post recently, I've
Can tonights nightly incremental backup be appended to the end of the
Bru / bru 2000 is a fine product that I may eventually buy. But it is not
the same catagory as arkeia/amanda.
Bru,afio,cpio,dump,tar are the "get data off filesystem into a stream"
catagory.
arkeia/amanda are at the "manage a bunch of streams from different systems
onto a tape server, catalog
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
Hi,
[...]
I'd check the jumpers to see if the unit allows hardware
compression to be set by software. Check either hp.com for this or the
unit documentation. Once you're sure that the unit allows it, use mt-dds
to set it. I found
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my
budget. Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes
killed it for me.
What do you mean by append? As I said on a post recently, I've
Can tonights
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Stephen Waters wrote:
Francisco Jose Montilla wrote:
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
Hi,
Here is the output of df -k:
Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
/dev/md0 5916736 811879 4798422
On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
I'm sorry this is a bit off-topic, but large raid sets need big backups ;-)
My HP SureStore DAT24 stops after writing 12 GB of data to a DDS-3 tape. I
suspect there must be something wrong with the compression. To verify this I
need some additional
i've found that software compression (with our cheesy seagate backup
exec s/w anyway..) compresses better than hardware because it is able to
reorganize the data in a more compressible manner rather than the drive
just compressing whatever hits the buffer.
we average just under 18GB per tape w/
At 12:33 PM 10/21/1999 -0500, Stephen Waters wrote:
i've found that software compression (with our cheesy seagate backup
exec s/w anyway..) compresses better than hardware because it is able to
reorganize the data in a more compressible manner rather than the drive
just compressing whatever hits
For me, I'm just tarring up hosts to tape. When the tape develops an
error, and I use software compression (i.e. -zvvcf /dev/nst0), then I'll
lose the whole session. If I let the tape drive compress, it won't
compress as good (like you said), but at least I only lose a file or two.
-kf
.
"I program my homecomputer; beam myself into
the future." --Kraftwerk, 1981
--
From: Kelly French[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 2:32 PM
To: Stephen Waters
Cc: Thomas Seidel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Help ne
Kelly French [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
For me, I'm just tarring up hosts to tape. When the tape develops an
error, and I use software compression (i.e. -zvvcf /dev/nst0), then I'll
lose the whole session. If I let the tape drive compress, it won't
compress as good (like you said), but at
On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Brian D. Haymore wrote:
Hi,
I'm sorry this is a bit off-topic, but large raid sets need big backups ;-)
Hehe, i'll take the oportunity also to ask a couple things ;)
My HP SureStore DAT24 stops after writing 12 GB of data to a DDS-3 tape. I
suspect
Now that someone has started this thread :)
Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
there?
I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my budget.
Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes killed it for me.
Anything else in
"Bruno Prior" [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The fact that the linux source includes legacy raid code which is incompatible with
the latest raidtools seems to cause a lot of misunderstandings. Can't the legacy
stuff be taken out and turned into a patch for those who like the older tools?
I
Do a mkraid --really-force /dev/md0
Greetings, Dietmar
Jason Speckman wrote:
Hi,
I have kernel 2.2.5 with raid 1 compiled in, raidtools 0.90. I want to mirror
my /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2 partitions. I already have data on /dev/sda2 and have
backed it up. When I do a mkraid -f
Hi!
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Jason Speckman wrote:
I have kernel 2.2.5 with raid 1 compiled in, raidtools 0.90. I
want to mirror my /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2 partitions. I already have
(problems.) [...]
Have you patched the kernel? A patch is needed for raidtools. Check the
FAQ and HOWTO?
hi abed
your are showing that sda5 and sdb5 is used as /local and /loca1
you cannot use those partitions in another raid partition ( /dev/md0 )
( take sda5 and sdb5 out of your /etc/fstab file )
in /etc/raid1.conf, you need to select partitions that are NOT used
anywhere else
if
Try mkraid --really-force /dev/md0
Im sure it will work.
Greetings, Dietmar
- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -
Absender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: help!
Empfänger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Datum: 09. Apr 1999 05:41
Help! im lost, finaly have found the new howto on ftp.fi.kernel.org after days
of
Chris Chabot wrote:
Help! im lost, finaly have found the new howto on ftp.fi.kernel.org after days
of dispair and old documentation... tried the new tools ... nada ... tried
kernel patches ... busted kernel 2.2.5 ...
My problem is this ... i created the /etc/raidtools (modified example
On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i was trying to apply raid0145-19981215 to 2.2.0pre4
I did the same to Pre5, same problem.
fetch the pre5 patch from
http://www.country.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/raid/alpha
-- mingo
Raid is not (yet?) safe as a module. Build it inside the kernel.
If I'm not mistaken, the 2.0.36 that came with RedHat 5.2 was the prepatch
version, not the final release.
If that's the case, you'll need to make the modules from the 2.0.36 final
kernel that you've got. "make modules" and "make modules_install" should
do it..
Brian
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998,
I am using RedHat 5.2 (raid supported) and am having a hell of a time
getting a root partition to boot as raid 1.
.
I am simply trying to set up mirroring on my root partition for High
Availability (as well as fault tolerance). I don't want my system to
lock if any one of the drives go
On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Marc A. Mnich wrote:
I am using RedHat 5.2 (raid supported) and am having a hell of a time =
getting a root partition to boot as raid 1.
Does anyone have Linux working in a root mounted RAID configuration? =20
What do the linuxrc and lilo.conf files need to look like?
i previously posted this. i reccommend you look through the raid
archives at
http://www.linuxhq.com/lnxlists/
and you will find most of what you need. please note: the raid tools i
list and patches i list below have since been updated also,
if you are using 5.2 you will find that redhat
On Thu, Nov 12, 1998 at 07:14:57PM +0800, Enbo Zhang wrote:
I use two SCSI partition(each 258M) as a raid1 device md1, and mount as /var
on my RH5.2 box.
get a fresh kernel, the latest raid patches from ftp.kernel.org
and the latest raid tools also.
set all raid partitions to type 0xfd
and
On Tue, 10 Nov 1998, Godfrey Nix wrote:
Sorry if this is a FAQ, but I cannot find anywhere the
notes on how to apply the raid patch to my kernel src
files.
line 229 in raidtools/README.
I am running RedHat version 5.1 (kernel 2.0.35)
and have pulled down the patch file
76 matches
Mail list logo
