On 7/11/06, Jason Murray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is it "standard" practice to use raidctl on a raid set while your system is
running from that raid set?
I'm just curious as to what "best practice" might be?
Last night I booted to a different disk so I could run raidctl -R against the
array while it was not being used. That caused a kernel panic and dumped me to
a debugger. I think I'm going to need to use it to send information to the
list. What is the best way to go about getting output from the kernel debugger
to a disk so I don't have to copy it by hand?
null modem serial cables are typicaly $6. See
http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq7.html#SerCon
you can debug post-reboot if you send 'boot crash' as well. Make sure
/var has the room for savecore.
Thanks in advance.
My first few months with raidframe caused many kernel panics. With 30
minutes of parity checking, this was a difficult learning experience.
I was initialy led to beleive that raidframe was hardly stable (and
therfor disabled in GENERIC).
However, as I gained experience with raidctl and raidframe, and traced
the panics to code level, I almost always found the panics were caused
by my misuse or misinterpretation of raidctl(8). A small book could
probobly be written on the many different situations you can find
yourself in with raidframe.
I havn't had a kernel panic for a long time, and have had 3 disks fail
since on a level 5 raid without issue reconstructing, changing
geometry, etc. If memory serves me, I may have reconstructed a mounted
raidset, though given the choice, I certainly wouldn't.
All in all, I find kernel panics with raidframe is just its way of
saying "Bad choice of arguments" :)
