Greetings,
I'm (somewhere) in the middle of upgrading from non-raid to RAID1.
I'm using RH6.2 on a dual PIII-450s w/ 2 Barracuda 20GB Seagates
(with minutely different geometries).
Looking at Section 4 of "the Boot + Root + Raid + Lilo : Software Raid HOWTO"
I've gotten up to 4.5 -
file. Should the /dev/mdx's which are equivalent to the / and /boot
filesystems, respectively, be the first ones to be mounted?
Doesn't matter. The kernel mounts the root and the others are mounted
when fstab is read (root is already mounted at this point).
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
This a report about real production experiment using both Linux
software RAID and a Mylex hardware RAID controler (real production
tend to be even harder than tests, even on a lower load, since
more special situations append).
My production server has:
2 x 8GB linux software RAID 1, Buslogic
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 17:35:22 +0200
From: Hubert Tonneau [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This a report about real production experiment using both Linux
software RAID and a Mylex hardware RAID controler (real production
tend to be even harder than tests, even on a lower load, since
more
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 13 12:00:21 2000
[snip]
So, the final unanswered question is why did the Mylex controler failed
that ungracefully if no disk contains dead blocks ?
My experimental conclusion is that Linux software RAID is even more
reliable (the two RAID sets
Leonard N. Zubkoff wrote:
Generally, the Mylex PCI RAID controllers take disks offline when certain types
of unrecoverable errors occur. The driver will log the reason for any disk
being killed as a console message. Without further information as to precisely
why the disks were taken
, since we are not going to use it any more.
The above "bad tag" message covers a multitude of sins, sometimes including
drives that become catatonic after a SCSI bus reset.
***** DAC960 RAID Driver Version 2.2.4 of 23 August 1999 *
Copyright 1998-1999 by Leonard N. Zubkoff [EMAIL
I just installed a raid with autodetection. During that I found
a (I think funny) problem which I want to report.
kernel 2.2.17pre13-RAID
pre-patch-2.2.17-13.bz2
raid-2.2.17-A0
raid1 was configured as module, the vmlinuz image is located
in a /boot partition. It looks like the module
hi christian
if you have a raid-root-fs, then
i think the problem is that the kernel cannot load
the modules unless the rootfilessystem is mounted
and /lib/modules/ is available. but without
the module, a mount is not possible. :-o
have you tried with compiled in support ?
ps: nice to see
Hermann 'mrq1' Gausterer wrote:
if you have a raid-root-fs, then
i think the problem is that the kernel cannot load
the modules unless the rootfilessystem is mounted
and /lib/modules/ is available. but without
the module, a mount is not possible. :-o
Looks like raid-root-fs and /boot
i have also some add-ons for the howto:
i have mailed them to michael, but i got no answer :-(
again my points:
1)
at 4.4 Copy the current OS to the new raid device
you should add a hint for creating a empty boot and proc
directory, my rh6.1 box hangs after the first reboot
with the floppy
You could probably make it work OK by using initrd and loading the module
with the script, but compiling in support would be much more straightforward.
On Sat, 12 Aug 2000, Christian Bucher wrote:
Hermann 'mrq1' Gausterer wrote:
if you have a raid-root-fs, then
i think the problem
I just wanted to thank you for putting together a *great* quick guide.
I'm working on stuff like this myself for our user group we've just
gotten started and I want to tell you what a time saver you have been.
thank you thank you thank you "dude" :)
Bill Blair
L.U.C.K.Y
Linux Users of Central
keep disk at the same location, even when other disks are
removed. It does break a few things though. I don't think it currently
works with RAID, at least not on 2.2.x
The setup I'm envisioning is a 2.2.16 kernel with the latest patches,
a single SCSI bus with 2 hard drives in a RAID 1 con
This is going to sound pretty stupid, but here goes anyway...
I got 2.2.16 and the latest patch from kernel.org, applied it and started to
rebuild.
The question is, where do I tell the kernel to use RAID-5?
I can't see it in the 'make menuconfig' stuff anywhere... Am I missing
something here
At 09:12 11/08/00 -0400, you wrote:
This is going to sound pretty stupid, but here goes anyway...
I got 2.2.16 and the latest patch from kernel.org, applied it and started to
rebuild.
The question is, where do I tell the kernel to use RAID-5?
I can't see it in the 'make menuconfig' stuff
Yeah, it's in there. I was blowing past that before... My mistake.
Thanks for the help.
--
On Aug 11 at 14:32, Nick Kay (nick) wrote:
Subject: Re: How do I tell the kernel I want RAID-5?
At 09:12 11/08/00 -0400, you wrote:
This is going to sound pretty stupid, but here goes anyway
* Is there a way of initializing the array without destroying data
on the first disk, so that reconstruction is commenced at once.
* How to deal with the problem that the first disk is also the
boot disk.
http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/docs/HOWTO/Boot+Root+Raid+LILO
su-27
e it possible to use
Ingo's older raid patches on 2.2.16 (before raid-2.2.16-A0 was released).
I'm not 100% sure, though.
This is a production system I am working on here. I can't afford to have it
down for an hour or two to test a new kernel. I'd rather not be working with
this mess to begin wit
Hi,
I am tearing my hair out over this stuff (I should have mentioned that I am
completely new to not only RAID but Linux in general). This is the first
task I have been given in my new job - talk about being thrown in at the
deep end! :)
I've written to many lists for help
Hi all,
I have a up and running web server system with one SCSI 17,5 GB
disk, and I'm thinking of putting in a extra 17,5 GB disk and
build an RAID-1 array.
Questions:
* Is there a way of initializing the array without destroying data
on the first disk, so that reconstruction is commenced
-Original Message-
From: Jane Dawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2000 2:03 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Problems booting from RAID
Hi,
I am tearing my hair out over this stuff (I should have
mentioned that I am
completely new to not only
or is alan cox's 2.2.17pre series recommended nowadays?
-tcl.
On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, tc lewis wrote:
sorry for mailing, but my HOWTO is rather outdated.
where's the latest raid stuff for linux kernel 2.2?
ie: the patch, and raidtools.
i'm upgrading from 2.2.14 to 2.2.16
Hi,
I decided to set up a completely RAID-based system using two identical IDE
hard disks, each with 3 partitions (boot, swap and data).
The setup is
hda1 and hdc1 = 800Mb boot
hda2 and hdc2 = 128Mb swap
hda3 and hdc3 = 3Gb data
I'm using kernel 2.4.0-test5 with Ingo's 'dangerous' raidtools
-Original Message-
From: Jane Dawson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 3:13 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Problems booting from RAID
Hi,
I decided to set up a completely RAID-based system using two
identical IDE
hard disks, each with 3 partitions
now in 2.4.x send a bug
report ;).
Yes, but it's useless because of the abysmal (absence of) speed. And
all the VM problems... The machine I need raid50 on is a central
server, if it stops everything else goes down. In fact I'm not using
2.4 on it precisely because of the VM/raid problems
On Mon, 7 Aug 2000, Carlos Carvalho wrote:
So can't this be fixed?
Everything can be fixed, the fact is that I'm not sure if it worth, we'd
better spend efforts in making 2.4.x more stable than overbackporting
new stuff to 2.2.x... The fix precisely to allow raid5 on raid0 could be
pretty
-Original Message-
From: Carlos Carvalho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2000 10:57 AM
To: Andrea Arcangeli
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: raid-2.2.17-A0 cleanup for LVM
In 2.2.x that's not possible but for _very_ silly reasons.
So can't this be fixed
answered everything with maturity, so no offense taken.
Hello,
I consider the current state of affairs with Software-RAID to
be unbelievable.
It's not as bad as you think. :-)
Maybe not to someone who follows the list regularly, but for someone who
needs to get things accomplished, it's
Andrea Arcangeli ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 3 August 2000 19:55:
On Aug 2, 7:12pm, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
} Subject: raid-2.2.17-A0 cleanup for LVM
This patch cleanups the new raid code so that we have a chance that LVM on
top of RAID will keep working. It's untested at the moment
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Aug 6 21:45:04 2000
Andrea Arcangeli ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 3 August 2000 19:55:
On Aug 2, 7:12pm, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
} Subject: raid-2.2.17-A0 cleanup for LVM
This patch cleanups the new raid code so that we have a chance that LVM on
top
On Aug 2, 7:12pm, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
} Subject: raid-2.2.17-A0 cleanup for LVM
This patch cleanups the new raid code so that we have a chance that LVM on
top of RAID will keep working. It's untested at the moment.
ftp://ftp.*.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches
On Thu, 3 Aug 2000, G.W. Wettstein wrote:
On Aug 2, 7:12pm, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
} Subject: raid-2.2.17-A0 cleanup for LVM
This patch cleanups the new raid code so that we have a chance that LVM on
top of RAID will keep working. It's untested at the moment.
ftp://ftp.*.kernel.org
the separate patches that compose that
kernel in the ftp site as well.
strange i was never able to run lvm on top ov raid with 2.4
the lvm tools just don't guess what an md device is :(
L.
--
Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Communication Media Services S.r.l.
This patch cleanups the new raid code so that we have a chance that LVM on
top of RAID will keep working. It's untested at the moment.
ftp://ftp.*.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/andrea/patches/v2.2/2.2.17pre13/raid-2.2.17-A0/raid-lvm-cleanup-1
Andrea
a2 channel
The 18.2 Gb disks are in raid0 software. Below the /etc/raidtab file:
raiddev /dev/md0
raid-level 0
nr-raid-disks 4
persistent-superblock 1
chunk-size 128
device /dev/sdb1
raid-disk 0
device
Hi,
While testing raid1 (raidsetfaulty, raidhotremove, raidhotadd, repeat),
I managed to get one raid set in a state where nr_disks was incorrect.
This became a problem when trying to use lilo, because it would only write
to one of the disks (since nr_disks was 1).
With one disk in the set
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 01:43:49PM +1000, Neil Brown wrote:
raid0 will only get close to 'n' times a single disc when you have a
number of separate threads accessing the device, otherwise there are
fewer opportunities for multiple drives to be accessed at once.
I believe that bonnie is
Does anyone keep an archive of the messages sent to this list accessible
via the web? I've been looking for one for some time now without any
luck.
--
Anthony Di Paola
Systems Administrator
ran a 2.2.11 kernel patched with the common RAID patches 0.90. 5
disks partitioned and configured in a RAID 5 array, with autoraid detection
enabled. Works like a blast.
When I upgraded to SuSE 6.4 I got the 2.2.16 kernel as you may know. I
notice that in this kernel there is indeed support
the web? I've been looking for one for some time now without any
luck.
FAQ Question number 1: Where can I find archives for the Linux-RAID mailing
list?
FAQ Answer number 1: There are several different archives, but I generally
use http://www.geocrawler.com/.
Greg
P.S. If anybody has more
into. I don't
know that they affect speed much, though they might.
I doubt it, see below
I'm ready to be proved wrong ... you may well have suceeded :-)
Could you be a little more specific? Speed comparisons on disk access?
Then you can't compare RAID with no RAID effectively. You could
had to raidhotadd the disk. Then it started
reconfiguring it.
That's expected behaviour.
I would like to be able to stop my raid array and switch off the power of
this box (not the computer). If I switch the array off and on, the scsi
disks do not spindle up. So I have to reboot the machine
On Wednesday July 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could you be a little more specific? Speed comparisons on disk access?
Then you can't compare RAID with no RAID effectively. You could compare the
speed of 2.2/2.4 RAID, and 2.2/2.4 no RAID, but comparisons across would
seem to be meaningless
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
If raid on 2.4 is fast than raid in 2.2, we say "great".
If it is slower, we look at the no-raid numbers.
If no-raid on 2.4 is slow than no-raid on 2.2, we say "oh dear, the
disc subsystem is slower on 2.4", and point the
, though they might.
I doubt it, see below
Could you be a little more specific? Speed comparisons on disk access?
Then you can't compare RAID with no RAID effectively. You could compare the
speed of 2.2/2.4 RAID, and 2.2/2.4 no RAID, but comparisons across would
seem to be meaningless. Later,
Ok
-Original Message-
From: Danilo Godec [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 12:22 AM
To: Neil Brown
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: raid and 2.4 kernels
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
If raid on 2.4 is fast than raid in 2.2, we say "
Hello,
Does anyone have a patch that will patch properly for 2.2.16?
I've looked on kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/raid/alpha but found only
2.2.12 patches and nothing later.
Thank you.
-reid
I used Ingo's patch from
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/raid-2.2.16-A0
and it built without issue. There is also a 2.2.17 patch that applies
cleanly against the Alan Cox's 2.2.17pre13 code for me.
-Nic Benders
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Reid Sutherland wrote:
Does anyone have
do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this list? I would be
interested in seeing some constructive discussion about the reports of
degraded RAID performance in the 2.4 kernels. It is particularly
disappointing given that SMP appears to be a lot better in 2.4 vs 2.2
--
ai
http
On Wed, 26 Jul 2000, Anton wrote:
do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this list? I would be
interested in seeing some constructive discussion about the reports of
degraded RAID performance in the 2.4 kernels. It is particularly
disappointing given that SMP appears
Dear Raiders,
I installed a 2.2.16 kernel over my Suse 6.3 (2.2.13) and patched them with
raid-2.2.16-A0.txt.
Installation of the raidtools-19990824-0.90.tar.gz , which is by the way the
same as raidtools-dangerous-0.90-2116.tar.gz (I checked, but maybe not
good enough), was a piece of cake
On Wednesday July 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this list? I would be
interested in seeing some constructive discussion about the reports of
degraded RAID performance in the 2.4 kernels. It is particularly
disappointing given that SMP
-Original Message-
From: Neil Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 7:41 PM
To: Anton
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: raid and 2.4 kernels
On Wednesday July 26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
do the kernel developers responsible for RAID read this
list
FDC 0 is a post-1991 82077
md driver 0.36.6 MAX_MD_DEV=4, MAX_REAL=8
raid0 personality registered
raid1 personality registered
I have patched my kernel with the ide patch. RAID support and both
the raid1 and raid0 personalities are compiled right into the kernel.
I'm using the raidtools
Hi Dhinesh...
In Raid 1, whatever disk u give as "raid disk 0" is used as primary to
construct the second "raid disk 1". So, what u should do is that remove the
failed disk, say /dev/sda1 and make the second working disk as "raid disk
0". and add the new disk to &q
Hi,
we are using Red Hat Linux 6.2 on Intel based machines.we are having two
18 GB harddrives and we did Raid 1( Mirroring) during Installation.suppose
if I remove
one of the disk,machine is booting well without any problem.My doubt is if
one of the harddisk fails then how to add the new
Greetings and apologies from the get-go for bothering you!
I'm working my way through implementing RAID-1 on my RH6.2 system
and saw that your email gets referenced on the mkraid -f command.
I'm following the latest Software-RAID HOWTO along with the instructions
available from RedHat and have
Hello,
I've been searching for a RAID howto or something like that, but havn't
found anyone.. What I'm after is the software raid in linux, i want to
add disks so it becomes one large...
Basically, i want to know which tools, limitations, possible FAQ or
HOWTO..
Regards
Fredrik
[Fredrik Lindström]
I've been searching for a RAID howto or something like that
What I'm after is the software raid in linux
Go to http://www.linuxdoc.org
Under HOWTOs, look for "Software RAID"
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO.html
James
--
James Manning [EMAIL
Hello,
We recently purchased a Dell PowerEdge 4400 server with a Perc3/di RAID
controller. It arrived this week (after cough 3 _months_ of hassling over
the order with Dell!!!) and I'm now setting it up. We have the system
with five drives total. Two are 9Gb and three are 36Gb. The two 9Gb
Hi all,
i have raid 0 setup in my box, and today i have a strange problem.
I compiled kernel 2.2.16, included all RAID[0,1,2,3,4] as modules, cretaed
an initrd image (mkinitrd /boot/initrd-2.2.16-10.img 2.2.16-10) and
rebooted.
The system, under no circumstances booted. It complained about
On Tue, Jul 18, 2000 at 03:20:58PM +0300, Dimitrios Stergiou wrote:
I compiled kernel 2.2.16, included all RAID[0,1,2,3,4] as modules, cretaed
an initrd image (mkinitrd /boot/initrd-2.2.16-10.img 2.2.16-10) and
rebooted.
The system, under no circumstances booted. It complained about &quo
Hi Everybody,
I need some help in configuring Raid based mirroring on a HP Netserver
LH4 (Intel based) system running Red Hat Linux 6.2 (Kernel ver.
2.2.14-5.0smp).
This system has a 9 GB disc, on which the OS has been loaded. Also,
there are 2 identical 36 GB discs, which have been configured
Hello all,
when I buy an ide hardware raid card, and I want run it on
linux, I need linux driver to use it?
-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02
this is the other two in raid1 (/dev/sdb)
please, stick to the redhat kernel (uhm get a newer one from updates.redhat.com)
stick to hardware raid since you have itavailable and let software raid alone
regards
L.
--
Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
When you made the initrd, did you do "--with=raid0"? (and any other raid
levels you need for the root drive)?
yeap, actually i tried once with:
mkinitrd --with=raid0
and once with:
mkinitrd --ifneeded
i also tried to compile raid0 in
Hello,
I created a raid linear this weekend merging two IDE disks (45g , 10g) on
a 2.2.16 kernel with the corresponding patches from
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/.
Today I moved the raid to another computer (home to work). I compiled a
similar kernel and applied the same
hello there,
i'm new in doing this raid, currently my boss asked me to do this raid1 for
him using 2 hard disk but i still have no idea how to set this raid up, i've
tried using the sample which is inside /usr/doc/raidtools-0.90
raidtab.sample but my machine just can't boot
can u pls indicate
Hi all,
I'm a bit new to RAID so I hope I'm not making a dumb mistake, but
here goes..
System: Dell PowerEdge 2300/450 (PII-450x2, 512MB RAM)
SCSI: AIC-7890, AIC-7860
All filesystems are on RAID (/, /usr, etc.), necessitating boot via
'initrd' method. (I *think* this is hardware RAID, since
I saw a blurb somewhere about this board offering built in
RAID 0 and 1, a BIOS thing. Is this just more WinRAID, like
the Promise Fasttrak?
--
Edward Schernau,mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Network Architect http://www.schernau.com
RC5-64#: 243249 e-gold
On Fri, Jul 14, 2000 at 05:24:27PM -0400, Edward Schernau wrote:
I saw a blurb somewhere about this board offering built in
RAID 0 and 1, a BIOS thing. Is this just more WinRAID, like
the Promise Fasttrak?
I have a KA7-100 and there is nothing RAID-related in the BIOS.
--
Randomly
Hi there,
all you need you will find in
http://www.linuxdoc.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO.html
but there are some things you have to do when you try
to make a boot-Raid. You will find hints for that in
this mailing-list and the HOWTO itself. I didn' try it
yet, I'm stuck with building the RAID
Hi all,
I want to upgrade a machine running 2.2.10 kernel running software raid to
2.2.16. I only found raid patches ending with 2.2.11 (ftp.fi.kernel.org),
will this work on 2.2.16?? And, is patching and installing the new kernel
enough to get things working? (I guess so, raid devices
On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Dirk Bonenkamp - Bean IT wrote:
I want to upgrade a machine running 2.2.10 kernel running software raid to
2.2.16. I only found raid patches ending with 2.2.11 (ftp.fi.kernel.org),
will this work on 2.2.16?? And, is patching and installing the new kernel
enough to get
Hi,
I try to configure a RAID-1 system, but I have some problems.
First of all I have tried to send a email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to be part of this list without any
results.
I'm running a Debian 2.2 system (potato). I downloaded the 2.2.16 kernel
and
the raid-2.2.16-A0
ter I have started to
run the raid in non-degraded mode?
To change boot device from /dev/hdc1 to /dev/md0 I guess that I use rdev to
update the kernel (I'm booting from a floppy for the moment - make zdisk).
What is a recommended chunk-size for partitions in this sizes:
# df
Filesystem
the company name and domain but
still have the old sendmail masqurade configured...
I hope that [EMAIL PROTECTED] approve me soon...
Majordomo result:
subscribe linux-raid [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Your request to [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
subscribe linux-raid [EMAIL PROTECTED]
has been forwarded
On Sun, Jul 09, 2000 at 11:04:20PM -0700, Gregory Leblanc wrote:
What's the current status of RAID on SPARC? I haven't had a chance to keep
up very much, as I wasn't using RAID on SPARCs. I'm about to build a
mirrored system here, and I'd like to make sure that I'm not going to get
hosed
software raid will NOT save you from power failure. it will save you from
disk/controller/cable failure only! do NOT lull yourself into a false sense of
security.
if you have a people who cant handle unix and powering down, then you need an
UPS and lock your box in a closet.
linux software raid
I am looking for
the raid-patch belonging
to the 2.2.14 Kernel.
The only file i found was
raid0145*2_2_14.bz.
But it was no C-file.
Maybe someone can help me.
I am trying to use mkraid to setup a software raid array. I have 3 * 4G
drives with a two partitions each. the first partition is a 64 byte
block for an Apple Partition Map, the rest is a unix partition. I have
setup the /etc/raidtab that is attached and when I try mkraid /dev/md0,
it sees
On Sat, 8 Jul 2000, Bill Jackson wrote:
I am trying to use mkraid to setup a software raid array. I have 3 * 4G
drives with a two partitions each. the first partition is a 64 byte
block for an Apple Partition Map, the rest is a unix partition. I have
setup the /etc/raidtab
sorry about that. I am using linux kernel 2.2.15, raidtools 0.90.0 and no raid
patch. I thought raid was in the kernel? i configured the kernel with raid
support. i still need to apply a patch?
Mike Black wrote:
You don't say what version of anything you are running.
What version
Jackson wrote:
> I am trying to use mkraid to setup a software raid array. I
have 3 * 4G
> drives with a two partitions each. the first partition is a
64 byte
> block for an Apple Partition Map, the rest is a unix partition.
I have
> setup the /etc/raidtab that is attached and when I try
...
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/
Download the patch and copy it to the kernel source directory at
/usr/src/linux.
#patch -p1 patch-name-here
should do the trick and patch the kernel source with the updated RAID.
Then recompile the kernel (making sure that you select all the RAID
I've started to notice strange entries in my quota tables on the
one of my RAID-1 partitions on a sparc64 2.2.16-RAID box. Basically,
the following entries are appearing, more every few days:
[root@durden /root]# repquota /usr
Block limits File
On Sat, Jul 08, 2000 at 11:42:14PM -0400, Gustav wrote:
I've started to notice strange entries in my quota tables on the
one of my RAID-1 partitions on a sparc64 2.2.16-RAID box. Basically,
the following entries are appearing, more every few days:
What quota package are you using
On Sun, 9 Jul 2000, Jakub Jelinek wrote:
It has to be patched, so that it reads/writes on sparc64 the same on-disk
format as does the kernel (ie. although the utilities may be 32bit, it has
to write several entries using long long).
Red Hat 6.x quota should work correctly, if you are using
I have got a machine that nearly coughed up blood yesterday because
someone pulled the power on it. The fscks were nasty, let me tell you that
I am happy for backup superblocks. Anyways, that was too close, I need a
RAID solution in this weekend, or I am going to panic.
The problem
http://www.redhat.com/~mingo/raid-patches/raid-2.2.16-A0
let me know if you have any problems with it.
patch -p0 raid-2.2.16-A0
what source kernel ? from ftp.kernel.org ? or from /usr/src/linux of
your distribution ?
From kernel.org, of course. Sorry for bothering all [EMAIL
booting with lilo and the
/-partition is also on the raid system.
The question is how do I change the disk 0 to be disk 1 and vice versa
without losing data? (I would like to do this even if the above condition
would not force me to do it.)
If you have mirrored the whole system it's no problem
on the raid system.
The question is how do I change the disk 0 to be disk 1 and vice versa
without losing data? (I would like to do this even if the above condition
would not force me to do it.)
If you have mirrored the whole system it's no problem to swap the two
disks. If LILO is installed
with lilo and the /-partition is also on the raid
system.
If you are using a recent LILO with the RAID1 patch, it will boot of either
disk.
The question is how do I change the disk 0 to be disk 1 and vice versa
without losing data?
I can see no reason so to do -- it should just work !
(I'm
Hi,
I've been reading docs but couldn't figure out how to re-create a raid
device without losing data.
What I wanna do is add a spare disk/partition to an existing raid1 array.
Is there a way to reconfigure the drive(s) without losing data?
I have changed the /etc/raidtab file and ran
"m
that are hard ...
I would:
1) backup the data to tape `just in case' ...
2) shut down the RAID array.
3) create an N+1 way raidtab entry with N-1 of the original disks,
and two `raid-failed' entries (so that you have a `backup' disk!).
4) FORCE the creation of the new raid array.
As the N
to reconfigure the drive(s) without losing data?
For RAID1 it's easy -- it's the other RAIDs that are hard ...
I would:
1) backup the data to tape `just in case' ...
2) shut down the RAID array.
3) create an N+1 way raidtab entry with N-1 of the original disks,
and two `raid-failed
Do you want to keep the N-way mirror with N copies, but add a spare so
that when one of the N fails, it will start re-constructing immediately,
...
If the former, just `raidhotadd'.
That is the one I was thinking of using.
Should be straightforward ...
Will it automatically recognize it as
Hello,
Do you want to keep the N-way mirror with N copies, but add a spare so
that when one of the N fails, it will start re-constructing immediately,
...
If the former, just `raidhotadd'.
That is the one I was thinking of using.
Should be straightforward ...
It was, thanks. IT's
On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Michael Ghens wrote:
Just need to know how hard it is to move from software to hardware
raid. Would I have to reformat the HD's? Any special considerations?
Almost certainly, you will need to move the data elsewhere, let the raid
card do its thing with the disks, partition
1 - 100 of 2301 matches
Mail list logo
