Torrey McMahon wrote:
Richard Elling wrote:
Good question. If you consider that mechanical wear out is what ultimately
causes many failure modes, then the argument can be made that a spun down
disk should last longer. The problem is that there are failure modes which
are triggered by a spin up.
Richard Elling wrote:
Good question. If you consider that mechanical wear out is what
ultimately
causes many failure modes, then the argument can be made that a spun down
disk should last longer. The problem is that there are failure modes
which
are triggered by a spin up. I've never seen
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I understand all the math involved with RAID 5/6 and failure rates,
but its wise to remember that even if the probabilities are small
they aren't zero. :)
Agreed. Another thing I've seen, is that if you have an A/C (Air
Conditioning) event in the
On Jan 30, 2007, at 09:52, Luke Scharf wrote:
Hey, I can take a double-drive failure now! And I don't even need
to rebuild! Just like having a hot spare with raid5, but without
the rebuild time!
Theoretically you want to rebuild as soon as possible, because
running in degraded mode
I understand all the math involved with RAID 5/6 and failure rates,
but its wise to remember that even if the probabilities are small
they aren't zero. :)
And after 3-5 years of continuous operation, you better decommission the
whole thing or you will have many disk failures.
Casper
David Magda wrote:
On Jan 30, 2007, at 09:52, Luke Scharf wrote:
Hey, I can take a double-drive failure now! And I don't even need
to rebuild! Just like having a hot spare with raid5, but without the
rebuild time!
Theoretically you want to rebuild as soon as possible, because running
in
David Magda wrote:
What about a rotating spare?
When setting up a pool a lot of people would (say) balance things
around buses and controllers to minimize single points of failure,
and a rotating spare could disrupt this organization, but would it be
useful at all?
Functionally, that
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 09:37:57PM -0500, David Magda wrote:
On Jan 29, 2007, at 20:27, Toby Thain wrote:
On 29-Jan-07, at 11:02 PM, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
I seem to remember the Massive Array of Independent Disk guys ran
into
a problem I think they called static friction, where
Hi,
This is not exactly ZFS specific, but this still seems like a
fruitful place to ask.
It occurred to me today that hot spares could sit in standby (spun
down) until needed (I know ATA can do this, I'm supposing SCSI does
too, but I haven't looked at a spec recently). Does anybody do
You could easily do this in Solaris today by just using power.conf(4).
Just have it spin down any drives that have been idle for a day or more.
The periodic testing part would be an interesting project to kick off.
--Bill
On Mon, Jan 29, 2007 at 08:21:16PM -0200, Toby Thain wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
Hi,
This is not exactly ZFS specific, but this still seems like a
fruitful place to ask.
It occurred to me today that hot spares could sit in standby (spun
down) until needed (I know ATA can do this, I'm supposing SCSI does
too, but I haven't looked
On 29-Jan-07, at 9:04 PM, Al Hopper wrote:
On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
Hi,
This is not exactly ZFS specific, but this still seems like a
fruitful place to ask.
It occurred to me today that hot spares could sit in standby (spun
down) until needed (I know ATA can do this, I'm
Hi Guys,
I seem to remember the Massive Array of Independent Disk guys ran into
a problem I think they called static friction, where idle drives would
fail on spin up after being idle for a long time:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,1941205,00.asp
Would that apply here?
Best Regards,
On Jan 29, 2007, at 20:27, Toby Thain wrote:
On 29-Jan-07, at 11:02 PM, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
I seem to remember the Massive Array of Independent Disk guys ran
into
a problem I think they called static friction, where idle drives
would
fail on spin up after being idle for a long
On 1/30/07, David Magda [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What about a rotating spare?
When setting up a pool a lot of people would (say) balance things
around buses and controllers to minimize single points of failure,
and a rotating spare could disrupt this organization, but would it be
useful at
Random thoughts:
If we were to use some intelligence in the design, we could perhaps have
a monitor that profiles the workload on the system (a pool, for example)
over a [week|month|whatever] and selects a point in time, based on
history, that it would expect the disks to be quite, and can
Hi Toby,
You're right. The healthcheck would definitely find any issues. I
misinterpreted your comment to that effect as a question and didn't
quite latch on. A zpool MAID-mode with that healthcheck might also be
interesting on something like a Thumper for pure-archival, D2D backup
work. Would
17 matches
Mail list logo
