Re: Re-add lost device entries without a reboot; troubleshoot RAID card
On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Jason Birch wrote: > > I should note that `camcontrol rescan 0` (Or `camcontrol rescan all`) > won't find da0. > For those who stumble upon this thread later looking for answers, I'm almost certain the problem I'm seeing is the same as described in http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=28252. I'm going to work through some of that to see if I can fix my problem. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Re-add lost device entries without a reboot; troubleshoot RAID card
On Sun, Jul 14, 2013 at 9:38 PM, Jason Birch wrote: > I have several hard drives running through an M1015 flashed to think it's > an LSI 9211-8i IT. I've been running them successfully for the last three > months through mps(4) as part of a raidz pool, but had the pool drop to a > degraded state when /dev/da0 (and associated gpt device) disappeared after > some apparent errors. > > After a reboot, I noticed that the disk that disappeared - da0 - was > successfully probed and resilvered back in to the existing pool. I ran a > short SMART self test and everything was fine. I ran a long SMART self test > and the drive disappeared again towards the end of the scan (I didn't get a > chance to view the results) > > I'd like to know if there's a way to suggest to 're-probe' connections to > see if there are any devices that can be reconnected. It's clear that the > drive is still around and at least partially responsive - is there a way I > can online this disk, as just a device in its own right, such that I can > finishing running the SMART diagnostics? > > I've read some old mentions of mps not being the most stable thing under > load, but the mentions are over a year old. The initial failure happened > right at the time the daily periodic was running (Which includes a check > for negative permissions on the zfs partition) and the second failure was > during a SMART long test, so I guess there's potential for "load" there. > How might I go about diagnosing whether this is just the drive or possibly > the card itself? I suppose the obvious "Move it off the raid card" is > probably a good first start... > > $ uname -a > FreeBSD blackfyre 9.1-RELEASE-p4 FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE-p4 #0: Mon Jun 17 > 11:42:37 UTC 2013 > r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC > amd64 > > dmesg output when things started going south the first time: > > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 > 5a ca e4 98 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 563 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c > xfer 0 > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 > 23 55 ec 58 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 557 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c > xfer 0 > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 > 5a d7 a7 f8 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 889 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c > xfer 0 > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 > 23 55 ec 60 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 61 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c > xfer 0 > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 > 23 55 ec 60 0 0 8 0 > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI > Status Error > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check > Condition > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: UNIT > ATTENTION asc:29,0 (Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred) > Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per > sense data) > Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 > 23 55 ec a0 0 0 8 0 > Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI > Status Error > Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check > Condition > Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: UNIT > ATTENTION asc:29,0 (Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred) > Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per > sense data) > > Device picked up again on restart: > > Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0 at mps0 bus 0 scbus0 target 0 lun 0 > Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: Fixed > Direct Access SCSI-6 device > Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: 600.000MB/s transfers > Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: Command Queueing enabled > Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: 2861588MB (5860533168 512 byte > sectors: 255H 63S/T 364801C) > > Device going south a second time: > > Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): READ(10). CDB: 28 0 d > 7d 76 10 0 0 38 0 > Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI > Status Error > Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check > Condition > Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: ABORTED > COMMAND asc:47,3 (Information unit iuCRC error detected) > Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per > sense data) > Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): READ(10). CDB: 28 0 d > 94 b8 20 0 0 38 0 > Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCS
Re-add lost device entries without a reboot; troubleshoot RAID card
I have several hard drives running through an M1015 flashed to think it's an LSI 9211-8i IT. I've been running them successfully for the last three months through mps(4) as part of a raidz pool, but had the pool drop to a degraded state when /dev/da0 (and associated gpt device) disappeared after some apparent errors. After a reboot, I noticed that the disk that disappeared - da0 - was successfully probed and resilvered back in to the existing pool. I ran a short SMART self test and everything was fine. I ran a long SMART self test and the drive disappeared again towards the end of the scan (I didn't get a chance to view the results) I'd like to know if there's a way to suggest to 're-probe' connections to see if there are any devices that can be reconnected. It's clear that the drive is still around and at least partially responsive - is there a way I can online this disk, as just a device in its own right, such that I can finishing running the SMART diagnostics? I've read some old mentions of mps not being the most stable thing under load, but the mentions are over a year old. The initial failure happened right at the time the daily periodic was running (Which includes a check for negative permissions on the zfs partition) and the second failure was during a SMART long test, so I guess there's potential for "load" there. How might I go about diagnosing whether this is just the drive or possibly the card itself? I suppose the obvious "Move it off the raid card" is probably a good first start... $ uname -a FreeBSD blackfyre 9.1-RELEASE-p4 FreeBSD 9.1-RELEASE-p4 #0: Mon Jun 17 11:42:37 UTC 2013 r...@amd64-builder.daemonology.net:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 dmesg output when things started going south the first time: Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 5a ca e4 98 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 563 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c xfer 0 Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 23 55 ec 58 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 557 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c xfer 0 Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 5a d7 a7 f8 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 889 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c xfer 0 Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 23 55 ec 60 0 0 8 0 length 4096 SMID 61 terminated ioc 804b scsi 0 state c xfer 0 Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 23 55 ec 60 0 0 8 0 Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI Status Error Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check Condition Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: UNIT ATTENTION asc:29,0 (Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred) Jul 11 03:07:20 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per sense data) Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): WRITE(10). CDB: 2a 0 23 55 ec a0 0 0 8 0 Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI Status Error Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check Condition Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: UNIT ATTENTION asc:29,0 (Power on, reset, or bus device reset occurred) Jul 11 03:07:25 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per sense data) Device picked up again on restart: Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0 at mps0 bus 0 scbus0 target 0 lun 0 Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: Fixed Direct Access SCSI-6 device Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: 600.000MB/s transfers Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: Command Queueing enabled Jul 14 15:04:15 blackfyre kernel: da0: 2861588MB (5860533168 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 364801C) Device going south a second time: Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): READ(10). CDB: 28 0 d 7d 76 10 0 0 38 0 Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI Status Error Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check Condition Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: ABORTED COMMAND asc:47,3 (Information unit iuCRC error detected) Jul 14 18:36:56 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per sense data) Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): READ(10). CDB: 28 0 d 94 b8 20 0 0 38 0 Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): CAM status: SCSI Status Error Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI status: Check Condition Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): SCSI sense: ABORTED COMMAND asc:47,3 (Information unit iuCRC error detected) Jul 14 18:37:02 blackfyre kernel: (da0:mps0:0:0:0): Retrying command (per sense data) Culminating in the device being removed from /dev/: Jul 14 18:39:17 blackfyre kernel: (noperiph:mps0:0:0:0): SMID 3 finished recovery after aborting TaskMID 667 Jul 14 18:39:17 blackfyre kernel: mps0
Re: ZFS: raid VS copies=n
In the last episode (Jun 07), Quartz said: > How does the ZFS option 'copies=n' and raid relate to and interact with > each other? specifically recovery in the event of a failure. For > example, is having three disks in a raid-1 configuration with copies=1 > effectively the same as having three disks in a raid-0 with copies=3? Are > the copies distributed uniformly across all drives in the pool, or > concentrated, or what? What happens with configs like a raid-z2 with > copies=2? Which / how many disks can you lose? The code will try to place the extra copies on different vdevs, but if that's not possible, it will try and place them at least 1/8th of the disk size apart on the same disk. Copies aren't meant to protect against whole disk loss, but more local damage within a disk. https://blogs.oracle.com/bill/entry/ditto_blocks_the_amazing_tape https://blogs.oracle.com/relling/entry/zfs_copies_and_data_protection -- Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: ZFS: raid VS copies=n
07.06.2013 18:52, Quartz: Question: How does the ZFS option 'copies=n' and raid relate to and interact with each other? specifically recovery in the event of a failure. For example, is having three disks in a raid-1 configuration with copies=1 effectively the same as having three disks in a raid-0 with copies=3? Are the copies distributed uniformly across all drives in the pool, or concentrated, or what? What happens with configs like a raid-z2 with copies=2? Which / how many disks can you lose? (I'm aware that like a lot of other ZFS options copies=n doesn't have to be global to the entire pool / directory structure, but for the sake of simplicity let's assume it is in this case). copies=n tries to allocate blocks on different disks but doesn't guarantee this nor that any single disk can be used to retrieve data. -- Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
ZFS: raid VS copies=n
Question: How does the ZFS option 'copies=n' and raid relate to and interact with each other? specifically recovery in the event of a failure. For example, is having three disks in a raid-1 configuration with copies=1 effectively the same as having three disks in a raid-0 with copies=3? Are the copies distributed uniformly across all drives in the pool, or concentrated, or what? What happens with configs like a raid-z2 with copies=2? Which / how many disks can you lose? (I'm aware that like a lot of other ZFS options copies=n doesn't have to be global to the entire pool / directory structure, but for the sake of simplicity let's assume it is in this case). __ it has a certain smooth-brained appeal ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: Also, not being able to boot if first disk has some error in boot section or just strangly dead is not an option too. However, i was just thinking, if i use gmirror then bios does not know anything about it. I may set both harddisk as boot disk, but if first disk is brain damaged then bios may just stuck trying to boot from it and will not pass boot attempt to the second disk. I don't know, it depends on bios of course. But this seems to be a disadvantage to a software raid. That's true. The similar situation with hardware RAID is when the controller fails. The metadata is probably specific to that manufacturer and maybe to that model of controller. It's a good idea to get spares, because as Murphy is my witness, in an emergency that controller will not be available in the same town, district, country, or continent. More likely it will have been long discontinued, with no data migration path. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
30.01.2013 19:28, Paul Kraus: On Jan 30, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Warren Block wrote: If you want to use the same drive for booting, it's possible. Create all three partitions on both drives manually. Then mirror the freebsd-ufs partition only. The contents of the freebsd-boot partition don't change often, and swap does not have to be mirrored. Note that if you do NOT mirror SWAP, then in the event of a disk failure you will most likely crash when the system tries to swap in some data from the failed drive. If you mirror swap then you do not risk a crash due to missing swap data. yes, that's what i wanted to say. Also, not being able to boot if first disk has some error in boot section or just strangly dead is not an option too. However, i was just thinking, if i use gmirror then bios does not know anything about it. I may set both harddisk as boot disk, but if first disk is brain damaged then bios may just stuck trying to boot from it and will not pass boot attempt to the second disk. I don't know, it depends on bios of course. But this seems to be a disadvantage to a software raid. Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Jan 30, 2013, at 10:22 AM, Warren Block wrote: > If you want to use the same drive for booting, it's possible. Create all > three partitions on both drives manually. Then mirror the freebsd-ufs > partition only. The contents of the freebsd-boot partition don't change > often, and swap does not have to be mirrored. Note that if you do NOT mirror SWAP, then in the event of a disk failure you will most likely crash when the system tries to swap in some data from the failed drive. If you mirror swap then you do not risk a crash due to missing swap data. -- Paul Kraus Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3 Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 30.01.2013 18:06, Warren Block: GPT partitions should work, just limit it to one mirrored partition per drive. Please, clarify what you mean here. If only one GPT partition on a drive is mirrored with another GPT partition on another drive, head contention never comes up. There is only one mirror. It does nearly eliminate the usefulness of GPT partitioning. Um... and how can i do that if i have a simple mirror with two drives and want to mirror everything on them? As i understand i will have at least bootable, swap and ufs parttions on those drives, that is 3 partitions at least. If you want to use the same drive for booting, it's possible. Create all three partitions on both drives manually. Then mirror the freebsd-ufs partition only. The contents of the freebsd-boot partition don't change often, and swap does not have to be mirrored. Not that it's easy or convenient, but it's an option. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
There seems to be one more advantage to gmirror If i understood correctly gmirror label -v -b split -s 2048 data da0 da1 da2 will create a tripple mirror raid 1, that is triple redundancy, which is hardly available on any hardware raid. Am i correct here? Also, does anyone know how to choose split threshold (-s 2048) correctly ? Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Jan 30, 2013, at 8:10 AM, Andrea Venturoli wrote: > You can spend the extra money you spare on the controller buying good disks; > as someone else pointed out don't get "desktop-class" ones, but "24x7" ones. Server Class drives buy you some improvement, but my recent experience with Seagate Barracuda ES.2 drives is not that good. I have had 50% of them fail within the 5-year warranty period. My disks run 24x7 and I use ZFS under FreeBSD 9 so I have not lost any data. I have: 2 x Seagate ES.2 250 GB (one has failed) 4 x Seagate ES.2 1 TB (two have failed) 2 x Hitachi UltraStar 1 TB (pre-WD acquisition), no failures, but they are less than 2 years old. They are also noticeably faster than the Seagate ES.2 I just ordered 2 x WD RE4 500 GB, we'll see how those do I go out of my way to purchase disks with a 5-year warranty, they are still out there but you have to look for them. -- Paul Kraus Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3 Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
30.01.2013 18:06, Warren Block: On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 30.01.2013 1:01, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html So, gmirror+GPT=conflict on last sector GPT+gmirror = hardrive head kill nice... So, for no more than 2TB disks the best way to go is GMIRROR of the drive +PARTITION on top of it? GPT partitions should work, just limit it to one mirrored partition per drive. Please, clarify what you mean here. If only one GPT partition on a drive is mirrored with another GPT partition on another drive, head contention never comes up. There is only one mirror. It does nearly eliminate the usefulness of GPT partitioning. Um... and how can i do that if i have a simple mirror with two drives and want to mirror everything on them? As i understand i will have at least bootable, swap and ufs parttions on those drives, that is 3 partitions at least. Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Wed, 30 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 30.01.2013 1:01, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html So, gmirror+GPT=conflict on last sector GPT+gmirror = hardrive head kill nice... So, for no more than 2TB disks the best way to go is GMIRROR of the drive +PARTITION on top of it? GPT partitions should work, just limit it to one mirrored partition per drive. Please, clarify what you mean here. If only one GPT partition on a drive is mirrored with another GPT partition on another drive, head contention never comes up. There is only one mirror. It does nearly eliminate the usefulness of GPT partitioning. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On 01/28/13 21:43, Artem Kuchin wrote: I am planning to use mirror configuration of two SATA 7200rpm 2TB disks. I personally vote for gmirror in this case; I've used it a lot and found it very good wrt to both performance and robustness. You can spend the extra money you spare on the controller buying good disks; as someone else pointed out don't get "desktop-class" ones, but "24x7" ones. Just my 2c. bye av. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
30.01.2013 1:01, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html So, gmirror+GPT=conflict on last sector GPT+gmirror = hardrive head kill nice... So, for no more than 2TB disks the best way to go is GMIRROR of the drive +PARTITION on top of it? GPT partitions should work, just limit it to one mirrored partition per drive. Please, clarify what you mean here. Or maybe there is a way to instruct gmirror do rebuild only what i say (manual rebuild) ? 'gmirror configure -n' ? Have not tried it. The trick would be to do that before multiple mirrors start rebuilding, which they will as soon as geom_mirror.ko is loaded. As i understand from the man page -n setup the device not to auto rebuild ever. So, this is probably the thing i want. I need to setup a test system and play with it a bit. Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
> My other concern is what happens when one drive goes down if we use > gmirror? Is it completelly transparent > and bad drive can be hot swapped while server is running and rebuild > started? > I am thinking now about gpt+gmirror (including boot and swap) > > Artem > Yes. In fact, you can test this by unplugging the data or power cable to a drive while the server is running. I've done this with consumer sata drives and, so far, not had a problem. The server stays up and running and disk access is not interrupted. I can then plug in a new disk and add it to the gmirror and the array rebuilds. I've not tried this with gpt, so I can't comment there. -Modulok- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: 29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html So, gmirror+GPT=conflict on last sector GPT+gmirror = hardrive head kill nice... So, for no more than 2TB disks the best way to go is GMIRROR of the drive +PARTITION on top of it? GPT partitions should work, just limit it to one mirrored partition per drive. Or maybe there is a way to instruct gmirror do rebuild only what i say (manual rebuild) ? 'gmirror configure -n' ? Have not tried it. The trick would be to do that before multiple mirrors start rebuilding, which they will as soon as geom_mirror.ko is loaded. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013 08:57:31 -0600, Warren Block wrote: As far a gmirror is concerned, yes, drives can be removed and new drives inserted while the mirror is running. Hot swap is more of an issue with the hardware. I have not tried it with SATA drives, although I think it should work. The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html Why isn't gmirror more intelligent? I hate to use Linux as an example, but mdadm won't simultaneously rebuild multiple RAID sets if they use the same physical providers to prevent this. Could this be added as a feature? Even a sysctl toggle? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
29.01.2013 18:57, Warren Block: On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html So, gmirror+GPT=conflict on last sector GPT+gmirror = hardrive head kill nice... So, for no more than 2TB disks the best way to go is GMIRROR of the drive +PARTITION on top of it? Or maybe there is a way to instruct gmirror do rebuild only what i say (manual rebuild) ? Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Tue, 29 Jan 2013, Artem Kuchin wrote: My other concern is what happens when one drive goes down if we use gmirror? Is it completelly transparent and bad drive can be hot swapped while server is running and rebuild started? I am thinking now about gpt+gmirror (including boot and swap) As far a gmirror is concerned, yes, drives can be removed and new drives inserted while the mirror is running. Hot swap is more of an issue with the hardware. I have not tried it with SATA drives, although I think it should work. The Handbook chapter on gmirror talks about the problems with GPT and GEOM metadata. In short: right now, they conflict. It's possible to mirror GPT partitions, but be aware that if you mirror more than one partition on a drive, a rebuild after replacing a drive could thrash the heads as mirrors are rebuilt simultaneously. http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
Artem Kuchin wrote: [snip] > The server is going to be a web server with many sites and with mysql > running on it. Nothing really really > heavy. Currently with run all this on our own server with 8 cores and > 16GB ram and 3ware raid1 > and cpu load is about 5% :) Everything is quick and responsive. I hope > to see the same on a software raid. The controller would be a slight concern. But for what you've described doing I doubt it will be a big deal. The 3Ware may have a faster processor on it than say a generic onboard built-in. But since all we're talking here is a RAID 1 mirror my guess is it may not be a big enough difference to see. Writes will be just as if you are writing to 1 drive, reads will be faster. Maybe that 5% cpu load turns into 6% or 7%. > I really don't want to deploy ZFS on a new server where all these site > need to migrate because i am kind of > "don't fix it if it is not broken" kind of guy. > UFS+journaling+softupdates served us well for years and snapshots > are available on ufs too. I understand; I've only played around with ZFS some on Solaris. I may move in that direction some day, but for now > My other concern is what happens when one drive goes down if we use > gmirror? Is it completelly transparent > and bad drive can be hot swapped while server is running and rebuild > started? > I am thinking now about gpt+gmirror (including boot and swap) I've never actually hot-swapped one but I can't see any reason why not. You can't use the gmirror remove directive when a drive has failed, but you do a gmirror forget , swap it, then just do gmirror insert to insert the replaced drive into the mirror. When everything is working as it should gmirror is mostly 'automatic', e.g. after the insert the rebuild just starts. Main thing I appreciated about this is the server stayed up and online after one drive died. My two servers at home are my testbeds to test out things first before doing stuff to the ones at work. I just installed both to 9.1. The difference now is I've used GPT (gpart) and this is new to me. Previously everything was always fdisk and disklabel. Both these machines are setup on one drive at this point and I haven't yet gotten into the mirroring yet. With the old fdisk/disklabel it was simple to just mirror the entire drive itself (slice). The other approach is to mirror partitions. I think I may need to do this as I think this is the way you have to proceed in order to avoid having gpt and gmirror both trying to claim the last sector on the drive (metadata storage). -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
29.01.2013 11:54, Michael Powell: Artem Kuchin wrote: I guess what I'm trying to point out is that low performance wrt software RAID will stem from other things besides just simply consuming a few CPU cycles. Today's CPUs have the cycles to spare. I've been using gmirror for RAID 1 mirrors for a few years now and am happy with this. I have had a few old drives die and the servers stayed up and online. This allowed me to defer the actual drive replacement and not have to drop everything and fight fire. Thank you everyone for replying. I realize that many other things affect the performance, not only the CPU power. For example, disk IO kernel multithreading is one of the things. But i guess in FBSD 9 it is more or less solved. The server is going to be a web server with many sites and with mysql running on it. Nothing really really heavy. Currently with run all this on our own server with 8 cores and 16GB ram and 3ware raid1 and cpu load is about 5% :) Everything is quick and responsive. I hope to see the same on a software raid. I really don't want to deploy ZFS on a new server where all these site need to migrate because i am kind of "don't fix it if it is not broken" kind of guy. UFS+journaling+softupdates served us well for years and snapshots are available on ufs too. My other concern is what happens when one drive goes down if we use gmirror? Is it completelly transparent and bad drive can be hot swapped while server is running and rebuild started? I am thinking now about gpt+gmirror (including boot and swap) Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Old FreeBSD server, raid issues.
Good day I have an old machine that has lost its raid (0/ stripe). Im trying to fix this. If I go [root@torry /usr/home/bclark]# gstripe list Geom name: st0 State: UP Status: Total=3, Online=3 Type: AUTOMATIC Stripesize: 65536 ID: 1006591079 Providers: 1. Name: stripe/st0 Mediasize: 360102297600 (335G) Sectorsize: 512 Stripesize: 65536 Stripeoffset: 0 Mode: r0w0e0 Consumers: 1. Name: ada0 Mediasize: 120034123776 (111G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r0w0e0 Number: 0 2. Name: ada1 Mediasize: 120034123776 (111G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r0w0e0 Number: 2 3. Name: ada4 Mediasize: 120034123776 (111G) Sectorsize: 512 Mode: r0w0e0 Number: 1 I see 'State: UP' if i: [root@torry /usr/home/bclark]# mount -t ufs /dev/stripe/st0a /mnt/ mount: /dev/stripe/st0a: Invalid argument [root@torry /usr/home/bclark]# fsck /dev/stripe/st0a fsck: Could not determine filesystem type [root@torry /usr/home/bclark]# fsck_ufs /dev/stripe/st0a ** /dev/stripe/st0a Cannot find file system superblock ioctl (GCINFO): Inappropriate ioctl for device fsck_ufs: /dev/stripe/st0a: can't read disk label If someone could help, it would be appreciated, of what the next step is, it would be appreciated. Kind Regards Brent Clark ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
Artem Kuchin wrote: > Hello! > > I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server. > The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good > options they do not > provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for > freebsd. > The server base conf is 8core 32gb ram 2.8+ ghz. > So, maybe someone has personal experience with both worlds and can tell > if it > really matters in such configuration if i go for software raid. What are > the benefits > and what are the negatives of software raid? How much is the performance > penalty? > I am planning to use mirror configuration of two SATA 7200rpm 2TB disks. > Nothing fancy. > File system planned is UFS with journaling. I can't say for sure exactly what's best for your needs, however, please allow me to toss out some very generic tidbits which may aid you in some way. Historically back when RAID was new, hardware controllers were the only way to go. Back then I would never look at software RAID for a server machine. Best to offload as much work away from the CPU as possible to free it up for running the OS. What has changed is the amount of raw horsepower available from modern-day processors as compared to when RAID first came out. On the multi-core monster CPUs of today software RAID is a perfectly viable consideration because there are CPU cycles to spare, so the "performance penalty" is less now than it once was. Having said that, there are several other considerations to keep in mind as well. The type of RAID required matters. If you want/need RAID 5/6 it is definitely better to go with hardware RAID because of the horsepower required to do the XOR parity generation. You would want RAID 5/6 running on a hardware controller and not on the CPU. On the other hand, RAID 0, 1, and 10 are fine candidates for software RAID. One thing I've noticed that seems to somewhat get lost in this discussion is equating software-based RAID with not needing to spend money on the expensive RAID controller. At first glance it does seem like quite a waste to spend hundreds of dollars on a really fast RAID controller and then turn all its functionality off and just use it JBOD style. If you truly want performance you still need the processing power of the hardware chip on the (expensive) controller. Most central to this is I/Os per second. This matters more to some workloads than others, with being a database server probably at the top of the list where I/Os per second is king. The better the chip on the controller card the more I/Os per second. Another thing that matters less wrt to server hardware is the third kind of RAID known as "fake" or "pseudo" RAID. This is mostly found on desktop PC motherboards and some low-end (cheap) hardware cards. There is a config in the BIOS to set up so-called "RAID", but it is only half of the matter - the other half is in the driver. FreeBSD does indeed have support for some of these "fake RAID" things but I stay far far away from them. Either go hardware or pure software only - the fakeraid is crap. Another thing I'd warn you about is the drives themselves. Take a look: http://wdc.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1397 Many people get very lucky much of the time and don't experience problems with this. Using drives designed for desktop PCs with RAID can be prone to problem. Drives designed for servers are more expensive, but I've always felt it is better to put server drives in servers. :-) In terms of a 'performance penalty' what you will find is it gets shifted away from just losing a few CPU cycles into other areas. If the drives are Advanced Format 4k sector critters and they aren't properly aligned in the partitioning phase of set up performance will take a hit. If the controller chip they are hooked up to is slow, then the entire drive subsystem will suffer. Another thing you will find that will surface as a problem area is the shift away from the old style DOS MBR scheme and towards GPT. Software RAID (and indeed hardware controllers too) store their metadata at the end of the drive and needs to be "outside" the file system. The problem arises when both the software raid and the GPT partitioning try to store metadata to the same location and collide. Just knowing about this in advance and spending some quality reading time about it prior to trying to set up the box will help greatly. Plenty has been written (even in this list) about this subject by people smarter than me so the info you need is out there, albeit it can be confusing at first. I guess what I'm trying to point out is that low performance wrt software RAID will stem from other things besides just simply consuming a few CPU cycles. Today's CPUs have the cycles to spare. I've been using gmirror
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Jan 28, 2013, at 3:43 PM, Artem Kuchin wrote: > I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server. > The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good options > they do not > provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for > freebsd. I prefer SW RAID, specifically ZFS, for two very large reasons: 1) Visibility: From the OS layer you have very good visibility into the health of the RAID set and the underlying drives. All of the lower end HW RAID solutions I have seen require proprietary software to "manage" the RAID configuration, usually from the physical system's BIOS layer. Finding good OS layer software to monitor the RAID and the drives has been very painful. If you don't know you have a failure, then you can't do anything about it and when you have a second failure you lose data. Running a HW RAID system and not being able to issue a simple command from the OS and see the status of the RAID scares me. 2) Error Detection and Correction: HW RAID relies on the drives to report read and write errors. With UNCORRECTABLE error rates of 10^-14 and 10^-15 and LARGE (1 TB plus) drives you are almost guaranteed to statistically run into UNCORRECTABLE errors over the life of a typical drive. ZFS has end to end checksums and can detect a single bad bit from a drive, if the set is redundant it can recreate the correct data and re-write it, effectively correcting the bad data on disk. NOTE: Larger, more expensive HW RAID systems address both of the above issues, but at a much higher cost in terms of money and management overhead. DISCLAIMER: I have been managing mission critical, cannot afford to lose it data under ZFS for over 5 years, with no loss of data (even with some horribly unreliable low cost HW RAID systems under the ZFS layer... if we had not used ZFS we would have lost data multiple times). -- Paul Kraus Deputy Technical Director, LoneStarCon 3 Sound Coordinator, Schenectady Light Opera Company ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On Mon, 28 Jan 2013, Per olof Ljungmark wrote: On 01/28/13 21:43, Artem Kuchin wrote: Hello! I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server. The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good options they do not provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for freebsd. The server base conf is 8core 32gb ram 2.8+ ghz. So, maybe someone has personal experience with both worlds and can tell if it really matters in such configuration if i go for software raid. What are the benefits and what are the negatives of software raid? How much is the performance penalty? I am planning to use mirror configuration of two SATA 7200rpm 2TB disks. Nothing fancy. File system planned is UFS with journaling. I won't delve into detail here but if the data is important HW RAID is where you want to be. Perhaps you could give us a little more details A problem with HW RAID is that if the controller breaks, you need to get an identical controller to replace it, or the data will be lost. With software raid, you can read the data on any machine that will boot FreeBSD. That is a great convenience compared to searching eBay for an obsolete controller with the proper rev level. We haven't noticed any speed disadvantage on modern multi-core hardware and RAID 1. The advantages of HW raid escape me - I understand that years ago it provided OS independence and reduced CPU load, but it no longer provides the former, and with 8 cores do you need the latter while waiting for a disk platter to spin? ZFS is worthwhile, too, especially since you have a good amount of memory. That would give you snapshots and some other desirable features, such as background scanning for defects that UFS doesn't have. about what the purpose of the server is? Mission-critical or low cost? Those two tends to be mutually exclusive... Surely the presence of SATA drives shows that low cost is essential. Mirroring and ZFS provide very important advantages. HW raid seems to fill a much needed gap (apologies to Brian Kernigan). daniel feenberg We are HP-only but have good experience from LSI as well. Just my $0.02. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Software raid VS hardware raid
On 01/28/13 21:43, Artem Kuchin wrote: > Hello! > > I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server. > The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good > options they do not > provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for > freebsd. > The server base conf is 8core 32gb ram 2.8+ ghz. > So, maybe someone has personal experience with both worlds and can tell > if it > really matters in such configuration if i go for software raid. What are > the benefits > and what are the negatives of software raid? How much is the performance > penalty? > I am planning to use mirror configuration of two SATA 7200rpm 2TB disks. > Nothing fancy. > File system planned is UFS with journaling. > I won't delve into detail here but if the data is important HW RAID is where you want to be. Perhaps you could give us a little more details about what the purpose of the server is? Mission-critical or low cost? Those two tends to be mutually exclusive... We are HP-only but have good experience from LSI as well. Just my $0.02. //per ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Software raid VS hardware raid
Hello! I have to made a decision on choosing a dedicated server. The problem i see is that while i can find very affordable and good options they do not provide hardware raid or even if they do it is not the best hardware for freebsd. The server base conf is 8core 32gb ram 2.8+ ghz. So, maybe someone has personal experience with both worlds and can tell if it really matters in such configuration if i go for software raid. What are the benefits and what are the negatives of software raid? How much is the performance penalty? I am planning to use mirror configuration of two SATA 7200rpm 2TB disks. Nothing fancy. File system planned is UFS with journaling. Artem ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Dell H710 and H310 Raid Controller
Does bcm5720 support committed to 9-Stable? On Sun, Nov 4, 2012 at 9:53 PM, Sean Bruno wrote: > On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 05:47 -0800, Omer Faruk SEN wrote: > > It seems right now only way to go with Rx20 Server models is to use > > Intel > > cards (dell provides i350 chipset network interfaces as alternative) > > The Broadcom 5720 support is in current right now. It will not be in > 9.1, but will be available in stable/9 soon-ish. > > Sean > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Dell H710 and H310 Raid Controller
On Sun, 2012-11-04 at 05:47 -0800, Omer Faruk SEN wrote: > It seems right now only way to go with Rx20 Server models is to use > Intel > cards (dell provides i350 chipset network interfaces as alternative) The Broadcom 5720 support is in current right now. It will not be in 9.1, but will be available in stable/9 soon-ish. Sean signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Dell H710 and H310 Raid Controller
Hi, Just tried 9.1-RC3 with R720 which has H710p( the only difference with H710 is 1 gb cache instead of 512mb ). It has recognized both H710p raid as mfid0 and also network cards are recognized as bgeX (*BCM5720)* but network cards times out (watchdog timeout) I think it is about http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=31769&page=2 It seems right now only way to go with Rx20 Server models is to use Intel cards (dell provides i350 chipset network interfaces as alternative) PS: I really need your comments on R420 with H710 or R320 with H310 raid controllers Regads. On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 4:10 PM, wrote: > On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 07:46:45PM +0200, Omer Faruk SEN wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Can anyone in this list verify that both RAID controllers are supported > on > > FreeBSD 8.3 or 9.1 > > Negative on 8.3. I'm running a post-8.3-release 8.3-STABLE compiled after > the new mfi driver went in. > > > H710 has LSISAS2208 dual-core PowerPC ROC > > H310 has LSISAS2008. > > > > I am planning to use these controllers on R420 and R320 Dell Servers. I > > would also like to get comments on these two platfoms and if there are > any > > issues on FreeBSD 9.1 (I know it is RC2 right now) > > I've got an H710 in an R620. It works fine for me. > > Of course, my system is lightly loaded for the most part. The past couple > of days I've had one client pounding on it via netatalk. It held up well > considering ZFS performing really badly on a 96% full pool when writing > a lot of data. But that's an outlier. Usually my system is lightly loaded. > > Make sure you turn off all power savings controls in the BIOS. > -- > Kevin P. Nealhttp://www.pobox.com/~kpn/ >On the community of supercomputer fans: > "But what we lack in size we make up for in eccentricity." > from Steve Gombosi, comp.sys.super, 31 Jul 2000 11:22:43 -0600 > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Dell H710 and H310 Raid Controller
Hi, Can anyone in this list verify that both RAID controllers are supported on FreeBSD 8.3 or 9.1 H710 has LSISAS2208 dual-core PowerPC ROC H310 has LSISAS2008. I am planning to use these controllers on R420 and R320 Dell Servers. I would also like to get comments on these two platfoms and if there are any issues on FreeBSD 9.1 (I know it is RC2 right now) Regards. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card driver in Freebsd 9.0
Hi,
I prepared an USB stick and added the /boot/loader.conf file with
"hw.hptrr.attach_generic=0" and it still didn't work :
"pciconf -lv" still showed the hptrr driver attached to the sat2-mv8
card and no harddisks were detected.
So I removed the /boot/loader.conf file and added the same line
("hw.hptrr.attach_generic=0") to /boot/defaults/loader.conf and guess
what !
It still doesn't work...
Just for the peace of mind I verified one more time if linux did
recognize the controller and indeed, it did.
Anyway, as you know, linux is a pain in the ass for someone who's
accustomed to FreeBSD so I bought a cheap PCI-X controller on ebay
today, as a temporary solution for replacing my current PCI sata
controller which is occupying a PCI slot I desperately need.
Are there any plans to fix this supermicro sat2-mv8 card problem in the
upcoming 9.1 release ?
kind regards,
Dirk
On 10/23/12 16:32, Mark wrote:
It would not hurt to try. =)
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand
ready to do violence on their behalf.
George Orwell
--- On Tue, 10/23/12, ds wrote:
From: ds
Subject: Re: supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card driver in Freebsd 9.0
To: "Mark"
Cc: dk...@skynet.be
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2012, 9:19 AM
I'm using a CD to install freebsd 9.0
on a computer. Removing the mv8
card wont't help me since I haven't got any sata interfaces
on my
motherboard.
Any idea if installing from an USB image would help if I
removed the
hptrr.ko module before installing from USB-stick ?
Kind regards,
Dirk
the system on On 10/23/12 16:13, Mark wrote:
Are you using a cd to install on the computer or to run
the computer from the cd?
I had to remove the mv8 card, install the system, then
alter the /boot/loader.config to ignore the hptrr driver.
add this line to disable "hw.hptrr.attach_generic=0"
If you booting from a live cd each time I think you
will need to create your own live cd with a custom kernel
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only
because rough men stand ready to do violence on their
behalf.
George Orwell
--- On Tue, 10/23/12, ds
wrote:
From: ds
Subject: Re: supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card
driver in Freebsd 9.0
To: "Mark",
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Cc: dk...@skynet.be
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2012, 8:28 AM
Hello,
the driver for the supermicro sat2-mv8 card
(88sx61xx
chip) is in the
kernel (mvs.ko module) indeed.
But the kernel keeps loading the wrong driver
(hptrr.ko) :
even when I
escape to the loaderprompt before booting the
kernel and
give the
command "unload hptrr.ko" or "disable-module hptrr"
, the
command
"pciconf" -lv still shows the hptrr driver attached
to the
sat2-mv8 card
(hptrr@pci0:3:1:0) when the system is booted from
the boot
CD.
So how can I resolve this problem without editing
the
iso-image of the
boot CD or DVD and getting rid of the hptrr.ko
module ?
kind regards,
Dirk
On 10/22/12 16:47, Mark wrote:
The driver is in the kernel.
See if this will help.
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-June/017810.html
People sleep peaceably in their beds at night
only
because rough men stand ready to do violence on
their
behalf.
George Orwell
HTH
--- On Mon, 10/22/12, ds
wrote:
From: ds
Subject: supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card
driver
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Cc: dk...@skynet.be
Date: Monday, October 22, 2012, 9:14 AM
Hello,
are there any plans to provide a driver for
the
supermicro
sat2-mv8 (8-port) sata raid card ?
Kind regards,
Dirk
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card driver in Freebsd 9.0
Hello, the driver for the supermicro sat2-mv8 card (88sx61xx chip) is in the kernel (mvs.ko module) indeed. But the kernel keeps loading the wrong driver (hptrr.ko) : even when I escape to the loaderprompt before booting the kernel and give the command "unload hptrr.ko" or "disable-module hptrr" , the command "pciconf" -lv still shows the hptrr driver attached to the sat2-mv8 card (hptrr@pci0:3:1:0) when the system is booted from the boot CD. So how can I resolve this problem without editing the iso-image of the boot CD or DVD and getting rid of the hptrr.ko module ? kind regards, Dirk On 10/22/12 16:47, Mark wrote: The driver is in the kernel. See if this will help. http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2010-June/017810.html People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. George Orwell HTH --- On Mon, 10/22/12, ds wrote: From: ds Subject: supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card driver To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: dk...@skynet.be Date: Monday, October 22, 2012, 9:14 AM Hello, are there any plans to provide a driver for the supermicro sat2-mv8 (8-port) sata raid card ? Kind regards, Dirk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
supermicro sat2-mv8 sata raid card driver
Hello, are there any plans to provide a driver for the supermicro sat2-mv8 (8-port) sata raid card ? Kind regards, Dirk ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: problem with RAID 1 and requesting for solutions
Dear Sir/Madam, Iam really appreciate if you take a look into below email and advise me any update. On 6/16/12 7:01 PM, "info smartelcom" wrote: > HI there, > > hope my email find you well, i recently order a server with below > configuration > > INTEL > 1x Quad-Core i5-2500 3.3GHz, 6M Cache > 16GB DDR3 > 2x 500GB SATAII > > then ask from my COLOCATION to install FreeBSD 8.2 or 8.3 with RAID 1, after > many times of fail in installation from colocation they said that we have > problem with RAID 1.we suggest them to play with different kind of RAID like > RAID 5 and they said as our requested server only have 2 HDD, its not possible > to set up RAID 5. > > now they said us that the only way for having backup of DATA in this condition > is set up a scheduled task to put back up of data in the second HDD . > > > > now i really need to know if there is a only way for having data back up in > this condition or you have better idea according to your experience.also if > its the only way , would it be a good level of data security ? > > > looking forward to hear from your side soon. > > Regards, > > Smartelcom Team > > > > Regards Shahram Haghnia Technical Director Smartelcom Communications Global Wholesale Services ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: question about prblem with raid 1 for freeBSD
On 22/06/2012 10:11, dude golden wrote: > INTEL > 1x Quad-Core i5-2500 3.3GHz, 6M Cache > 16GB DDR3 > 2x 500GB SATAII > then ask from my COLOCATION to install FreeBSD 8.2 or 8.3 with RAID > 1, after many times of fail in installation from colocation they said > that we have problem with RAID 1.we suggest them to play with > different kind of RAID like RAID 5 and they said as our requested > server only have 2 HDD, its not possible to set up RAID 5. Correct. RAID5 requires at least 3 drives. The only way to have resilience against disk failure with just two drives is to use RAID1 (mirroring). How exactly are your colleagues attempting to set up RAID1. There are several different ways of doing it, but these are the most popular: * Using the built-in ATAPI RAID provided by many motherboards * gmirror * ZFS ATAPI RAID is perhaps the least effective, and may require downtime in order to rebuild the system after a disk failure. I suspect this is what is causing your colleagues problems. For setting up a gmirror RAID see this article: http://onlamp.com/pub/a/bsd/2005/11/10/FreeBSD_Basics.html (That will work fine with 8.2 or older and the old sysinstall; needs to be adapted if using the new bsdinstall with gpart) For setting up a ZFS mirror, see: http://wiki.freebsd.org/RootOnZFS/GPTZFSBoot/Mirror or I wrote a similar piece assuming use of bsdinstall: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/articles/install-on-zfs/ Both of the gmirror or ZFS procedures involve going beyond what the installer provides and doing at least part of the work from the command line. If that is too scary to contemplate, then try using the PC-BSD installer to install FreeBSD -- it lets you set up mirrors or ZFS from a menu system, and can install plain FreeBSD as well as PC-BSD: http://www.pcbsd.org/index.php?option=com_zoo&view=item&Itemid=98 > now they said us that the only way for having backup of DATA in this > condition is set up a scheduled task to put back up of data in the > second HDD . Well, this is really unsatisfactory and your colleagues should be ashamed. First of all, RAID1 is not *backup*. If you accidentally delete a file, it will be removed from both of the mirrored drives. The thing that RAID1 gets you is resilience to disk failure: one of your drives going 'pop' will not result in the system crashing or any service interruption. Backup of the system should be arranged through some other means: there are many programs available to do the job in the base system or the ports -- personally I like tarsnap, which will backup your data to the cloud (Amazon flavoured cloud, that is) for a very reasonable rate. Cheers, Matthew -- Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: question about prblem with raid 1 for freeBSD
On 6/22/12 11:11 AM, dude golden wrote: > HI there, > > hope my email find you well, i recently order a server with below > configuration > > INTEL > 1x Quad-Core i5-2500 3.3GHz, 6M Cache > 16GB DDR3 > 2x 500GB SATAII > > then ask from my COLOCATION to install FreeBSD 8.2 or 8.3 with RAID 1, after > many times of fail in installation from colocation they said that we have > problem with RAID 1.we suggest them to play with different kind of RAID like > RAID 5 and they said as our requested server only have 2 HDD, its not > possible to set up RAID 5. > > now they said us that the only way for having backup of DATA in this > condition is set up a scheduled task to put back up of data in the second HDD > . > > > > now i really need to know if there is a only way for having data back up in > this condition or you have better idea according to your experience.also if > its the only way , would it be a good level of data security ? > > > looking forward to hear from your side soon. > > Regards, > > Smartelcom Team Hi, Your colleagues are correct about the RAID levels, you can only do RAID5 with a minimum of 3 disks. Your available options with 2 disks are JBOD, RAID0 or RAID1. You obviously want RAID1. How have they tried to install the server ? I've had no problems ever installing 8.2 or 8.3 as a RAID using either gmirror, or hardware RAID. Does the server have a hardware RAID controller or are you trying software RAID ? Do you have remote console access to the server ? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
question about prblem with raid 1 for freeBSD
HI there, hope my email find you well, i recently order a server with below configuration INTEL 1x Quad-Core i5-2500 3.3GHz, 6M Cache 16GB DDR3 2x 500GB SATAII then ask from my COLOCATION to install FreeBSD 8.2 or 8.3 with RAID 1, after many times of fail in installation from colocation they said that we have problem with RAID 1.we suggest them to play with different kind of RAID like RAID 5 and they said as our requested server only have 2 HDD, its not possible to set up RAID 5. now they said us that the only way for having backup of DATA in this condition is set up a scheduled task to put back up of data in the second HDD . now i really need to know if there is a only way for having data back up in this condition or you have better idea according to your experience.also if its the only way , would it be a good level of data security ? looking forward to hear from your side soon. Regards, Smartelcom Team ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
I used 'hardware RAID' because that is -precisely- how the OP described their equipment. unfortunately this is true - it is DESCRIBED as such. lie is standard tool in todays IT marketing. What are facts: - very few controllers actually have some RAID support. those usually have onboard RAM in substantial amount and preferably - battery backed. - unless you need RAID-5,6 or similar hardware cannot speed it up much. - gmirror/gstripe in FreeBSD is vastly superior to any RAID including true hardware ones - if configured properly. unless you treat single-process sequential read as measure of performance. even graid5 (from ports) is close to, or even outperform true hardware RAID, but CPU load is substantial. - RAID hardware does not allow any flexibility, like partitioning disks and using different RAID styles for parts. very useful. - with FreeBSD software RAID you will be able to access your data in every computer with SATA port. That's simple. And Dell does offer at least one such controller. Yes true. Actually all recently bought servers i have to manage are Dells (yes their 24-hour warranty replacement on place actually work!). And i always make sure no "hardware" RAID is present :), to get best performance. Actually i told Dell marketer i will be recommending hardware RAID solution for Dell when he prove it will actually outperform my software RAID10 setup with same amount of same disks. Still not proved ;) Of course you have to properly configure both "hardware" and software RAID. The cases where true hardware RAID may help is it's battery backup write-buffer that consume forced syncs (database commits etc) when they are common. still if it is an issue it means than database software is really badly designed if it have to sync constantly. But if there is no choice, today there are simple solutions like small-size SLC flash drive or battery backed ramdisk in extreme cases. Further, I, personally, have a fairly similar Compaq machine, which has hardware RAID, with it's own BIOS (including configuration/setup screens). what is the chip that you say it is hardware RAID? I dare to not believe you, but possibly you are right. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
> From woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl Sat May 19 06:51:00 2012 > Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 13:48:18 +0200 (CEST) > From: User Wojtek > To: Robert Bonomi > cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, te...@sunset.tx.net > Subject: Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by > FreeBSD 9.0-R installation > > > FreeBSD will use a hardware RAID device -only- if the particular type of > > RAID chip/chipset/controller is known to the included device drivers. > > do not use "hardware RAID" for such things as this is nothing else > than normal controller and BIOS/driver support. 'Male bovine excrement' applies. I used 'hardware RAID' because that is -precisely- how the OP described their equipment. And Dell does offer at least one such controller. That aside, my statement is entirely accurate, _as_written_, regardless of the hardwaare that the OP has. Now, I'll grant it is possible that you know more about the OP's equipment than I do, but _I_ will assume that the OP knows what they are talking bout, with regard to -their- hardware configuration. Further, I, personally, have a fairly similar Compaq machine, which has hardware RAID, with it's own BIOS (including configuration/setup screens). Oh, yes, FreeBSD _does_ recognize the raid volumes -- with NO RAID support whatsoever in the O/S itself. I run full-custom kernels with no loadable modules, I _know_ what capbilites are/aren't present. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
FreeBSD will use a hardware RAID device -only- if the particular type of RAID chip/chipset/controller is known to the included device drivers. do not use "hardware RAID" for such things as this is nothing else than normal controller and BIOS/driver support. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
the system setup menu, the boot menu shows that "freebsd90" is the first (and only) bootable hard drive. Yet when I try to install FreeBSD 9.0-R, FreeBSD ignores the hardware RAID and sees the two separate drives, instead of seeing a single logical drive. good lesson to NEVER use this pseudo-RAID interfaces and use gmirror instead. not only you can make more complex RAID setup, get higher performance from gmirror and be always able to access data independently of "hardware" RAID onboard which is just normal controller. Just don't use BIOS RAID ever. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
On Fri, 18 May 2012, tess lamont wrote: I created a RAID 1 drive in a Dell Optiplex 755, using the internal RAID controller and two 160GB drives, naming the logical drive "freebsd90". Within the system setup menu, the boot menu shows that "freebsd90" is the first (and only) bootable hard drive. Yet when I try to install FreeBSD 9.0-R, FreeBSD ignores the hardware RAID and sees the two separate drives, instead of seeing a single logical drive. See graid(8). If it supports that controller, FreeBSD should be able to boot from the array and use it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Fri May 18 15:12:56 2012 > Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 14:58:26 -0500 (CDT) > From: tess lamont > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Subject: Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD > 9.0-R installation > > I created a RAID 1 drive in a Dell Optiplex 755, using the internal RAID > controller and two 160GB drives, naming the logical drive "freebsd90". > Within the system setup menu, the boot menu shows that "freebsd90" is the > first (and only) bootable hard drive. > > Yet when I try to install FreeBSD 9.0-R, FreeBSD ignores the hardware RAID > and sees the two separate drives, instead of seeing a single logical > drive. FreeBSD will use a hardware RAID device -only- if the particular type of RAID chip/chipset/controller is known to the included device drivers. >From some casual searching on the 'net, I can't find anything that indicates -what- RAID controller is in the Optiplex 755. IF you know, or can find that info, check: <http://www.freebsd.org/releases/9.0R/hardware.html#DISK> to see if that disk controller is listed. If yes, it should 'just work'. If it is not listed, you're out of luck. If you can't in the controller informtion, you'll need to post something that includes the boot-up messages showing what FreeBSD found for disks and disk controllers. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Optiplex 755 RAID 1 logical drive configuration ignored by FreeBSD 9.0-R installation
I created a RAID 1 drive in a Dell Optiplex 755, using the internal RAID controller and two 160GB drives, naming the logical drive "freebsd90". Within the system setup menu, the boot menu shows that "freebsd90" is the first (and only) bootable hard drive. Yet when I try to install FreeBSD 9.0-R, FreeBSD ignores the hardware RAID and sees the two separate drives, instead of seeing a single logical drive. Is there a way to get FreeBSD 9.0 to recognize the Optiplex 755 RAID 1 drive? If not, can I just install FreeBSD to one of the drives and expect the hardware RAID to mirror it properly? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Resetting RAID1 drive as Non-RAID
On 2/10/2012 7:15 AM, Robert Fitzpatrick wrote: I have a FreeBSD 9.0 server with an Intel RAID card that has two array mirrors of which one has failed. The remote host was not responding and had it reset to find in the RAID utility one of the drives had failed one of the RAID 1 arrays. Perhaps I shouldn't have, but I told the utility to use the drive again and it added back to the array with the 'Rebuild' message on the array, which means to rebuild the array within the OS. I went into the system as single user mode and did a 'fsck -y' on all the /etc/fstab mounts... backup# cat /etc/fstab # DeviceMountpoint FStype Options DumpPass# /dev/ar0s1b noneswapsw 0 0 /dev/ar0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 /dev/ar0s1f /home ufs rw 2 2 /dev/ar0s1d /usrufs rw 2 2 /dev/ar0s1e /varufs rw 2 2 #/dev/ar1s1d/data ufs rw,userquota,groupquota2 2 /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 The drive that failed is in the ar1 array. I can mount /data in single user mode and see all files fine, but it continues to report INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT messages and UNEXPECTED SOFT UPDATE INCONSISTENCY errors as well as allocated frags marked free and reports CLEAN no matter how many times I run fsck on the drive. I can mount the /data partition in normal mode, but will receive errors about 'lock order reversal' when doing umount on the drive or it will lock the system after several minutes with panic error if left mounted. Assuming my problem is that the drive needs to be replaced, now that the drive is in the array again, the utility no longer indicates which drive is bad. I believe I remember which it was, but not 100% sure. Is there a way to determine which physical drive is bad using FreeBSD? If able to reset to Non-RAID, would that allow FreeBSD to mount the DEGRADED array and continue to access to the data or does the drive need to be pulled in order to possibly satisfy FreeBSD to allow me to mount RAID-1 array DEGRADED? In the end, I am hoping to mount this array with the one drive until I can get the replacement drive installed. Thanks for any help, I realize some of this is related to the Intel RAID, just wanted to see if someone was familiar with how to recover from such a situation. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" Using smartctl might be able to tell you which drive had a problem. It's not a guarantee though. Try the simple method, open up the case, unplug one drive and boot. If it works, you pulled the right drive. If it doesn't, try the other instead. If neither drive works right, attempt to update your backup asap. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Resetting RAID1 drive as Non-RAID
I have a FreeBSD 9.0 server with an Intel RAID card that has two array mirrors of which one has failed. The remote host was not responding and had it reset to find in the RAID utility one of the drives had failed one of the RAID 1 arrays. Perhaps I shouldn't have, but I told the utility to use the drive again and it added back to the array with the 'Rebuild' message on the array, which means to rebuild the array within the OS. I went into the system as single user mode and did a 'fsck -y' on all the /etc/fstab mounts... > backup# cat /etc/fstab > # DeviceMountpoint FStype Options > DumpPass# > /dev/ar0s1b noneswapsw 0 0 > /dev/ar0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 > /dev/ar0s1f /home ufs rw 2 2 > /dev/ar0s1d /usrufs rw 2 2 > /dev/ar0s1e /varufs rw 2 2 > #/dev/ar1s1d/data ufs > rw,userquota,groupquota2 2 > /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 The drive that failed is in the ar1 array. I can mount /data in single user mode and see all files fine, but it continues to report INCORRECT BLOCK COUNT messages and UNEXPECTED SOFT UPDATE INCONSISTENCY errors as well as allocated frags marked free and reports CLEAN no matter how many times I run fsck on the drive. I can mount the /data partition in normal mode, but will receive errors about 'lock order reversal' when doing umount on the drive or it will lock the system after several minutes with panic error if left mounted. Assuming my problem is that the drive needs to be replaced, now that the drive is in the array again, the utility no longer indicates which drive is bad. I believe I remember which it was, but not 100% sure. Is there a way to determine which physical drive is bad using FreeBSD? If able to reset to Non-RAID, would that allow FreeBSD to mount the DEGRADED array and continue to access to the data or does the drive need to be pulled in order to possibly satisfy FreeBSD to allow me to mount RAID-1 array DEGRADED? In the end, I am hoping to mount this array with the one drive until I can get the replacement drive installed. Thanks for any help, I realize some of this is related to the Intel RAID, just wanted to see if someone was familiar with how to recover from such a situation. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Need Help with a Raid 1 Time critical issue.
On 08.02.2012 6:17, Morris Allen wrote: > I have been using the following instructions, I am unable to maintain a > Raid1 installation. I have sent this to the Bug group and programming group > ( docs/164620 <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=164620&cat=docs> : > Raid 1 issues) and was told to contact your groups. During the initial setup > the Raid appears to be there. But when I reboot, the system stops, and will > not totally reboot. One issue is my fstab file, using basis install, does > not look anything like the file listed below. I really need to get this > going my time is getting short and I am in trouble on this box. On reboot, > it destroys the Raid that it indicated was present, before the reboot. I > have listed my equipment below and have pasted a copy of the instructions I > use to the letter. Probably as quick workaround you can set variable kern.geom.part.check_integrity="0" in your /boot/loader.conf. See also: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-geom/2012-January/005149.html -- WBR, Andrey V. Elsukov signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Need Help with a Raid 1 Time critical issue.
A link to the Handbook would be preferable to copying all the information. If this is FreeBSD-9.0, then it's due to a GPT/gmirror conflict and a more particular boot loader. See the release notes: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/9.0R/relnotes-detailed.html#AEN1277 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Need Help with a Raid 1 Time critical issue.
To whom it may concern: I have been using the following instructions, I am unable to maintain a Raid1 installation. I have sent this to the Bug group and programming group ( docs/164620 <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=164620&cat=docs> : Raid 1 issues) and was told to contact your groups. During the initial setup the Raid appears to be there. But when I reboot, the system stops, and will not totally reboot. One issue is my fstab file, using basis install, does not look anything like the file listed below. I really need to get this going my time is getting short and I am in trouble on this box. On reboot, it destroys the Raid that it indicated was present, before the reboot. I have listed my equipment below and have pasted a copy of the instructions I use to the letter. Your help would be greatly appreciated, as I have a time limit on this box and the clock is ticking. This unit must be working with all software before Feb. 28. Thanks Morris Allen (Moe) Environment Intel DQ 57Tm Motherboard Intel Processor I5 650 8gb Kingston mem 2- 1TB Sata 3 Hard Drives Unable to install Raid1 Description Using the following instructions, I am unable to maintain a Raid1 installation. I have sent this to the programming group ( docs/164620 <http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=164620&cat=docs> : Raid 1 issues) and was told to contact document group. During the initial setup the Raid appears to be there. But when I reboot, the system stops, and will not totally reboot. One issue is my fstab file, using basis install, does not look anything like the file listed below. I really need to get this going my time is getting short and I am in trouble on this box. This is the setup that I am trying to use. # sysctl kern.geom.debugflags=17 Now create the mirror. Begin the process by storing meta-data information on the primary disk device, effectively creating the /dev/mirror/gm device using the following command: Warning: Creating a mirror out of the boot drive may result in data loss if any data has been stored on the last sector of the disk. This risk is reduced if creating the mirror is done promptly after a fresh install of FreeBSD. The following procedure is also incompatible with the default installation settings of FreeBSD 9.X which use the new GPT partition scheme. GEOM will overwrite GPT metadata, causing data loss and possibly an unbootable system. # gmirror label -vb round-robin gm0 /dev/da0 The system should respond with: Metadata value stored on /dev/da0. Done. Initialize GEOM, this will load the /boot/kernel/geom_mirror.ko kernel module: # gmirror load Note: When this command completes successfully, it creates the gm0 device node under the /dev/mirror directory. Enable loading of the geom_mirror.ko kernel module during system initialization: # echo 'geom_mirror_load="YES"' >> /boot/loader.conf Edit the /etc/fstab file, replacing references to the old da0 with the new device nodes of the gm0 mirror device. Note: If vi(1) is your preferred editor, the following is an easy way to accomplish this task: # vi /etc/fstab In vi(1) back up the current contents of fstab by typing :w /etc/fstab.bak. Then replace all old da0 references with gm0 by typing :%s/da/mirror\/gm/g. The resulting fstab file should look similar to the following. It does not matter if the disk drives are SCSI or ATA, the RAID device will be gm regardless. # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump Pass# /dev/mirror/gm0s1b none swap sw 0 0 /dev/mirror/gm0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 /dev/mirror/gm0s1d /usr ufs rw 0 0 /dev/mirror/gm0s1f /home ufs rw 2 2 #/dev/mirror/gm0s2d /store ufs rw 2 2 /dev/mirror/gm0s1e /var ufs rw 2 2 /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 Reboot the system: # shutdown -r now How-To-Repeat This is a clean install each time and I have the same results everytime I try to install the Raid1. No change.. this is the x64 BSD V9 Morris Allen (Moe) ___ E-mail is a privilege. Not a right. Stop Spam now!!! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: software raid
On Tue, 7 Feb 2012, Jim Pazarena wrote: Does FreeBSD support any type of software raid? I have an old rack mount server which has 8 bays, but all SATA, and NO raid. Sure would be nice to have a software raid to create a NAS device. Sure, multiple ways, in fact: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-striping.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-mirror.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/geom-raid3.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/filesystems-zfs.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/vinum-vinum.html http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/disks-hast.html That's a start. gmirror and ZFS are probably the most common. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: software raid
> Does FreeBSD support any type of software raid?
> I have an old rack mount server which has 8 bays, but all SATA,
> and NO raid. Sure would be nice to have a software raid
> to create a NAS device.
Yes!
An example of setting up a 3 disk raidz might look like this:
zpool create myfancyraid raidz ad4 ad6 ad8
zfs create myfancyraid/foo
zfs set mountpoint=/usr/foo myfancyraid/foo
zfs mount -a
cd /usr/foo
echo "hello world" > hello.txt
Yay! Then edit /etc/rc.conf to enable zfs at boot time:
echo 'zfs_enable="YES"' >> /etc/rc.conf
How's my raid doing today? Cake:
zpool status
zfs list
You can even mix and match raid and encryption. Below, I put a raidz on top a
geli encryption layer on three devices. (There are other ways to do this too.)
When it comes time to decommission disks, there's no company data leaks
(depending on your needs):
# Create the geli:
geli init -b -e AES -l 256 /dev/ad4
geli init -b -e AES -l 256 /dev/ad6
geli init -b -e AES -l 256 /dev/ad8
# Attach it or reboot:
geli attach ad4
geli attach ad6
geli attach ad8
# Make the zpool and Z file system:
zpool create myfancyraid raidz ad4.eli ad6.eli ad8.eli
zfs create myfancyraid/foo
zfs set mountpoint=/usr/foo myfancyraid/foo
zfs mount -a
Then edit /boot/loader.conf to load geli at boot time::
echo 'geom_eli_load="YES"' >> /boot/loader.conf
Finally, add the bit about ZFS to /etc/rc.conf::
echo 'zfs_enable="YES"' >> /etc/rc.conf
You'll be asked for the password to each provider (disk) at boot time before
the system enters multi-user mode. Make sure you have console access
and a backup copy of the password somewhere!
A word on graid3: For a multi-user file server, serving lots of small requests,
graid3 is about the worst performance you can get due to its raid3 nature.
Requests have to be served sequentially, using all disks in the array.
Slow in my experience.
Good luck!
-Modulok-
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
software raid
Does FreeBSD support any type of software raid? I have an old rack mount server which has 8 bays, but all SATA, and NO raid. Sure would be nice to have a software raid to create a NAS device. -- Jim Pazarena fqu...@paz.bz ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, the wise Polytropon wrote: Does this image boot successfully? Unfortunately this is also a no go. I think Intel has done something special to their iso's, considering that I'm missing 7MB of data. Regards, Marco -- Men have as exaggerated an idea of their rights as women have of their wrongs. -- Edgar W. Howe ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, the wise Polytropon wrote: Does this image boot successfully? I don't know yet because I've used all my cd-r's :-(. Within a few days I'm expecting some new cd-rw's and I'll let you know how things went. If you compare your ISO with the original one, file sizes should be the same for all files; are they? A reason could be that the original one contains some "metadata" that the creating program (which will very probably _not_ be mkisofs as you're using) may have stored there. Things like for example an application ID, copyright information, media name. Maybe the original program did use a different "mechanism" to create the ISO? You can easily add the file sizes inside the original ISO and compare them to your sources (which should be equal) and see where the difference comes from. I think it will be some file system metadata (remember that the ISO-9660 file system occupies "invisible" space within the ISO file). I compared the original iso from Intel with the one generated by me and I really can't see any differences. My generated one is 9MB, and 8 MB of metadata seems a lot to me, or isn't it?. Don't know how Intel makes his iso's. Regards, Marco -- From the moment I picked your book up until I put it down I was convulsed with laughter. Some day I intend reading it. -- Groucho Marx, from "The Book of Insults" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012 01:11:30 +0100 (CET), Marco Beishuizen wrote: > On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, the wise Polytropon wrote: > > > If this is depending on the name "[BOOT]", there are > > two ways to deal with special characters in file names, > > if you need to specify them on the command line: > > > > a) use escape sequences: > > -b \[BOOT\]/Bootable_HardDisk.img > > > > b) use quoting: > > -b "[BOOT]/Bootable_HardDisk.img" > > I used escape sequences and that works. The "no match" error is gone. By using [ and ], the shell tries to expand a regular expression where [BOOT] means "one of the letters B, O, or T; neither B/Bootable_HardDisk.img, O/Bootable_HardDisk.img or T/Bootable_HardDisk.img is present, so the shell fully correctly replies with "no match". (In a similar fashion, * and ? are interpreted by the shell.) > > Also read "man mkisofs" about the boot-related > > options, especially -b, where > > > > If the boot image is not an image of a floppy, you need to add > > one of the options: -hard-disk-boot or -no-emul-boot. If the > > system should not boot off the emulated disk, use -no-boot. > > > > is mentioned. Maybe consider using -G instead of -b? > > I tried the -G option and removed the -hard-disk-boot option and now it > created an iso without errors. The size is still 9MB though. I looked > inside the original iso and the one generated by me but I really can't see > any differences. Does this image boot successfully? If you compare your ISO with the original one, file sizes should be the same for all files; are they? A reason could be that the original one contains some "metadata" that the creating program (which will very probably _not_ be mkisofs as you're using) may have stored there. Things like for example an application ID, copyright information, media name. Maybe the original program did use a different "mechanism" to create the ISO? You can easily add the file sizes inside the original ISO and compare them to your sources (which should be equal) and see where the difference comes from. I think it will be some file system metadata (remember that the ISO-9660 file system occupies "invisible" space within the ISO file). -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
On Sun, 8 Jan 2012, the wise Polytropon wrote: If this is depending on the name "[BOOT]", there are two ways to deal with special characters in file names, if you need to specify them on the command line: a) use escape sequences: -b \[BOOT\]/Bootable_HardDisk.img b) use quoting: -b "[BOOT]/Bootable_HardDisk.img" I used escape sequences and that works. The "no match" error is gone. Also read "man mkisofs" about the boot-related options, especially -b, where If the boot image is not an image of a floppy, you need to add one of the options: -hard-disk-boot or -no-emul-boot. If the system should not boot off the emulated disk, use -no-boot. is mentioned. Maybe consider using -G instead of -b? I tried the -G option and removed the -hard-disk-boot option and now it created an iso without errors. The size is still 9MB though. I looked inside the original iso and the one generated by me but I really can't see any differences. -- The future is a race between education and catastrophe. -- H. G. Wells ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
On Fri, 6 Jan 2012 17:22:57 +0100 (CET), Marco Beishuizen wrote: > After that I tried to create the iso with: > root@yokozuna:/data2/tmp# mkisofs -r -J -b [BOOT]/Bootable_HardDisk.img > -hard-disk-boot -o raid.iso /data2/tmp > which gives an error: mkisofs: No match > > First I thought the directory name [BOOT] was weird so I changed this to > BOOT. Running mkisofs -r -J -b BOOT/Bootable_HardDisk.img -hard-disk-boot > -o raid.iso /data2/tmp creates an iso, but when I burn this to a cd it > doesn't boot. If this is depending on the name "[BOOT]", there are two ways to deal with special characters in file names, if you need to specify them on the command line: a) use escape sequences: -b \[BOOT\]/Bootable_HardDisk.img b) use quoting: -b "[BOOT]/Bootable_HardDisk.img" Also read "man mkisofs" about the boot-related options, especially -b, where If the boot image is not an image of a floppy, you need to add one of the options: -hard-disk-boot or -no-emul-boot. If the system should not boot off the emulated disk, use -no-boot. is mentioned. Maybe consider using -G instead of -b? > Strange thing also is the fact that the original iso has the size of > ~17MB, but the created iso by me is ~10MB. So it seems I'm missing some > files. You can mount the ISO you've generated and look inside to find out which files may be missing, or if there are differences in file sizes. -- Polytropon Magdeburg, Germany Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0 Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ... ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
journal on raid device
Hello everyone! I recently bought a via6421 bulk raid controller and I'm trying to get journalling working. I've partitioned it and set up journal with fdisk, bsdlabel and gjournal: # fdisk -I /dev/ar0 # bsdlabel -w /dev/ar0 # gjournal load # gjournal label /dev/ar0s1a # newfs -O 2 -J /dev/ar0s1a.journal # echo 'geom_journal_load="YES" ' >> /boot/loader.conf After that I can mount a filesystem and do whatever I want. But after reboot I have no /dev/ar0s1a.journal, only /dev/ar0s1a that I can mount without journalling. However, on the disks that comprize the massive, file systems with journals are visible and mountable. They are ad8s1a.journal ad9s1a.journal. # mount /dev/ad8s1a.journal on /mnt (ufs, local, read-only, gjournal) # uname -a FreeBSD pasty.lan 8.2-STABLE-201105 FreeBSD 8.2-STABLE-201105 #0: Tue May 17 05:46:49 UTC 2011 r...@almeida.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC i386 How can I enable journalling on ar0s1a? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
creating a bootable iso for raid BIOS flash
Hi, I have an Intel SRCU42X raid controller that currently has firmware version 414D. The bios flash was done by a "system update package", from Intel which is an iso file that you can burn to a cd. The upgrade to 414D went fine. But the newest firmware version is 414I and is not available as a bootable iso, only as a 414I.rom file (windows only etc.). So I thought: lets alter the 414D iso to the newest 414I iso, and make a new bootable iso. But this was harder than I thought. I extracted the original iso file with file-roller and replaced the 414D.rom file with 414I.rom, and modified the .bat-files references from 414D to 414I. The files and directories in the original iso are: -rwxr-xr-x 1 marco wheel 7828 Feb 9 2006 LICENSE.TXT drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SRCS16 drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SRCS28X drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SRCU41L drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SRCU42E drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SRCU42L drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:24 SRCU42X drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SRCZCRX drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 SROMB42E -rwxr-xr-x 1 marco wheel 1207 Aug 23 2004 SUP.BAT -rwxr-xr-x 1 marco wheel 3732 Feb 11 2006 SUP.TXT -rwxr-xr-x 1 marco wheel 4350 Mar 10 2006 SUP_Release_note.txt -rwxr-xr-x 1 marco wheel 5479 Feb 10 2006 UPDATE.BAT -rwxr-xr-x 1 marco wheel 244 Jan 6 11:25 VER_LOAD.BAT drwxr-xr-x 2 marco wheel 512 Jan 6 11:19 [BOOT] The SRCU42X directory contains the 414I.rom file, an irflash.exe update utility and a run.bat batch file (running irflash.exe with reference to the .rom file). The [BOOT] directory contains one file: Bootable_HardDisk.img. After that I tried to create the iso with: root@yokozuna:/data2/tmp# mkisofs -r -J -b [BOOT]/Bootable_HardDisk.img -hard-disk-boot -o raid.iso /data2/tmp which gives an error: mkisofs: No match First I thought the directory name [BOOT] was weird so I changed this to BOOT. Running mkisofs -r -J -b BOOT/Bootable_HardDisk.img -hard-disk-boot -o raid.iso /data2/tmp creates an iso, but when I burn this to a cd it doesn't boot. Strange thing also is the fact that the original iso has the size of ~17MB, but the created iso by me is ~10MB. So it seems I'm missing some files. So what am I doing wrong and what is the correct commandline to create a bootable iso for flashing a raid controller bios? Thanks, Marco -- If I promised you the moon and the stars, would you believe it? -- Alan Parsons Project ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Freebsd installation problem with 3ware 8506-4LP - storage controller (RAID)
> From owner-freebsd-questi...@freebsd.org Sat Dec 24 23:42:28 2011 > Date: Sun, 25 Dec 2011 00:38:04 -0500 > From: heat...@trans-world.org > To: > Subject: Freebsd installation problem with 3ware 8506-4LP - storage > controller (RAID) > > Hello, we tried to instal Freebsd with my 3ware 8506-4LP - storage > controller (RAID) > and it seems freebsd does not support my raid card could you please > tell me how to fox this problem? Read the list of supported hardware. See: <http://www.freebsd.org/releases/index.html> select "hardware notes' for the release version of the O/S you are using. The '3Ware 8506-4LP" is listed there. It requiress the 'twe' disk driver software, which _is_ provided by the standard distribution, *BUT* manual configuration is required. you have to do the indicated 'magic' for the installer before it will see the controller an disks as installation targets. Then you have to do it AGAIN for the installed system, before booting it. The 'twe' manpage describes what is required. You can find it from the hardware notes link mentioned above. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Freebsd installation problem with 3ware 8506-4LP - storage controller (RAID)
Hello, we tried to instal Freebsd with my 3ware 8506-4LP - storage controller (RAID) and it seems freebsd does not support my raid card could you please tell me how to fox this problem? Here below ismy data center message I got after they tried to instal freebsd on my server, regards, Miss Riverso Unfortunately it appears that FreeBSD is unable to "see" your raid card or the drives attached to it. I am able to setup the raid 10 array but once the FreeBSD installer starts, the drives are not visible. I have looked for any drivers that may be available for FreeBSD and I am unable to locate them. At this point we can either reinstall the machine with a different OS or provide you with a kvm ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Mentioning of geom in the handbook's RAID chapter.
Leon Meßner wrote: > Hi, > > I recently searched google for "FreeBSD software raid" because i wanted > to compare the advice google gives me for creating a software raid in > linux and freebsd. First hit here was the link to the handbook page > (18.4). This page still is only talking about ccd and vinum. I know > there is a whole chapter about geom but why is there no mentioning about > that in the Storage.RAID part of the Handbook ? > This is mostly pure conjecture on my part, but I think it is most likely a separation between "old" and "new". The Handbook is maintained and contributed to in an ad-hoc manner over long periods of time by ever changing volunteers and I think there is a conservative approach to reorganizing or changing something someone else had contributed previously. The volunteer who wrote the GEOM chapter simply may not wish to alter what someone else contributed. Although not perfect, I still think the Handbook is one of the best examples of documentation around. -Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Mentioning of geom in the handbook's RAID chapter.
Hi, I recently searched google for "FreeBSD software raid" because i wanted to compare the advice google gives me for creating a software raid in linux and freebsd. First hit here was the link to the handbook page (18.4). This page still is only talking about ccd and vinum. I know there is a whole chapter about geom but why is there no mentioning about that in the Storage.RAID part of the Handbook ? Sincerly, Leon ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Booting from firmware RAID
On Wed,16-03-2011 [16:25:54], Ilya Kazakevich wrote: > Thank you. > > I configured boot0 to my ar0 and tried to boot from it. It freezes. > I use RAID10 and Intel-ICH7. > > Looks like I've faced with some other troubles.. > > Ilya. > > On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:05 PM, mcoyles > wrote: > > > >This is probably more PC-specific than freebsd-specific question. I have > > >intel firmware raid. OS needs drivers to work with it. FreeBSD sees it as > > >ar0, so it has drivers. > > >But I want my OS to be installed on this drive and boot from it. It is not > > >good idea, but I really want to do it:) > > >Is it possible? > > > > > >boot0 and boot1 both work with HDD via BIOS interrupts and CHS, right? So, > > >how do they know how to access RAID? They has no drivers. > > >Or BIOS supports interrupts to access RAID with out of drivers? If so -- > > >what for drivers are needed? To access drive via ATA interface? > > > > Bios support interrupts and can thus boot from firmware raid. > > Under windows drivers typically just give you full speed / management > > features > > > > - > > Marci > > > > Hi, here what man atacontrol says: Although the ATA driver allows for creating an ATA RAID on disks with any controller, there are restrictions. It is only possible to boot on an array if it is either located on a real RAID controller like the Promise or Highpoint controllers, or if the RAID declared is of RAID1 or SPAN type; in case of a SPAN, the partition to boot must reside on the first disk in the SPAN. Not sure if it's your case though. -- A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that works. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Booting from firmware RAID
My boot0 freezes. I found discussion where guy told that extipl works fine but boot0 not because extipl uses LBA instead of CHS and some raids do not support CHS. It is new to me that BIOS allows LBA but I will try extipl now. On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 5:11 PM, b. f. wrote: > > This is probably more PC-specific than freebsd-specific question. I have > > intel firmware raid. OS needs drivers to work with it. FreeBSD sees it as > > ar0, so it has drivers. > > But I want my OS to be installed on this drive and boot from it. It is > not > > good idea, but I really want to do it:) > > Is it possible? > > > > boot0 and boot1 both work with HDD via BIOS interrupts and CHS, right? > So, > > how do they know how to access RAID? They has no drivers. > > Or BIOS supports interrupts to access RAID with out of drivers? If so -- > > what for drivers are needed? To access drive via ATA interface? > > > > Is it possible to boot freebsd from "firmware raid"? > > Sometimes: it depends on the firmware, and your bios. I had a add-in > PCIe SATA RAID controller based on a Marvell SE9128 chipset, and using > a Marvell firmware. The bios and the FreeBSD 9-CURRENT bootloader > were able to boot from a JBOD drive attached to the controller, up > until the point where the ahci driver tried to take control of the > drive. Then the Marvell firmware presented a fictitious configuration > to the ahci driver and returned invalid device signatures, so the boot > process failed. On the same machine, however, I was able to boot > without problems from a JBOD drive attached to a PCI-X SATA RAID > controller based on the Silicon Image SiI3124 chipset, using a Silicon > Image firmware. > > b. > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Booting from firmware RAID
> This is probably more PC-specific than freebsd-specific question. I have > intel firmware raid. OS needs drivers to work with it. FreeBSD sees it as > ar0, so it has drivers. > But I want my OS to be installed on this drive and boot from it. It is not > good idea, but I really want to do it:) > Is it possible? > > boot0 and boot1 both work with HDD via BIOS interrupts and CHS, right? So, > how do they know how to access RAID? They has no drivers. > Or BIOS supports interrupts to access RAID with out of drivers? If so -- > what for drivers are needed? To access drive via ATA interface? > > Is it possible to boot freebsd from "firmware raid"? Sometimes: it depends on the firmware, and your bios. I had a add-in PCIe SATA RAID controller based on a Marvell SE9128 chipset, and using a Marvell firmware. The bios and the FreeBSD 9-CURRENT bootloader were able to boot from a JBOD drive attached to the controller, up until the point where the ahci driver tried to take control of the drive. Then the Marvell firmware presented a fictitious configuration to the ahci driver and returned invalid device signatures, so the boot process failed. On the same machine, however, I was able to boot without problems from a JBOD drive attached to a PCI-X SATA RAID controller based on the Silicon Image SiI3124 chipset, using a Silicon Image firmware. b. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Booting from firmware RAID
Thank you. I configured boot0 to my ar0 and tried to boot from it. It freezes. I use RAID10 and Intel-ICH7. Looks like I've faced with some other troubles.. Ilya. On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 4:05 PM, mcoyles wrote: > >This is probably more PC-specific than freebsd-specific question. I have > >intel firmware raid. OS needs drivers to work with it. FreeBSD sees it as > >ar0, so it has drivers. > >But I want my OS to be installed on this drive and boot from it. It is not > >good idea, but I really want to do it:) > >Is it possible? > > > >boot0 and boot1 both work with HDD via BIOS interrupts and CHS, right? So, > >how do they know how to access RAID? They has no drivers. > >Or BIOS supports interrupts to access RAID with out of drivers? If so -- > >what for drivers are needed? To access drive via ATA interface? > > Bios support interrupts and can thus boot from firmware raid. > Under windows drivers typically just give you full speed / management > features > > - > Marci > > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Booting from firmware RAID
Hello, This is probably more PC-specific than freebsd-specific question. I have intel firmware raid. OS needs drivers to work with it. FreeBSD sees it as ar0, so it has drivers. But I want my OS to be installed on this drive and boot from it. It is not good idea, but I really want to do it:) Is it possible? boot0 and boot1 both work with HDD via BIOS interrupts and CHS, right? So, how do they know how to access RAID? They has no drivers. Or BIOS supports interrupts to access RAID with out of drivers? If so -- what for drivers are needed? To access drive via ATA interface? Is it possible to boot freebsd from "firmware raid"? Ilya. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Can RAID driver be loaded from loader.conf?
In the last episode (Feb 10), Toomas Aas said: > I'm preparing for a migration from single SATA disk attached to onboard > SATA controller to 3ware 9750-4i RAID system. In preparation, while the > system is still running on single disk, I downloaded the latest tws.ko > driver from LSI website and added it to loader.conf: tws_load="YES" > > Further plan is to install the controller and new disks into the system > alongside with the existing disk, create partitions on new disk and copy > over all the contents using dump and tar. After that remove the existing > single disk. > > Is it safe to assume that the system will boot from RAID if RAID > controller driver is loaded from loader.conf, or is it absolutely required > to have the RAID driver statically built into the kernel? You should be able to load raid drivers as modules just fine. /boot/loader uses BIOS calls to read both the kernel and any modules listed in loader.conf, so if it can load the kernel, it should be able to load the modules too. -- Dan Nelson dnel...@allantgroup.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Can RAID driver be loaded from loader.conf?
Hello! I'm preparing for a migration from single SATA disk attached to onboard SATA controller to 3ware 9750-4i RAID system. In preparation, while the system is still running on single disk, I downloaded the latest tws.ko driver from LSI website and added it to loader.conf: tws_load="YES" Further plan is to install the controller and new disks into the system alongside with the existing disk, create partitions on new disk and copy over all the contents using dump and tar. After that remove the existing single disk. Is it safe to assume that the system will boot from RAID if RAID controller driver is loaded from loader.conf, or is it absolutely required to have the RAID driver statically built into the kernel? -- Toomas Aas ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Issues with ar0(Host Raid) adaptec after upgrade to 8.2
Hey All, I'm having an odd issue, and the only thing I can imagine is that there has been a major change between 8.1 and 8.2. Using the 8.1 kernel everything is dandy. But when I try to use a newly compiled kernel from 8.2(GENERIC) I have no luck. Root will not mount. Here are relevant kernel messages under 8.1... FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE-p2 #2: Mon Jan 31 19:25:14 EST 2011 atapci2: port 0x30d8-0x30df,0x30cc-0x30cf,0x30d0-0x30d7,0x30c8-0x30cb,0x3060-0x307f mem 0xc400-0xc7ff irq 19 at device 31.2 on pci0 atapci2: [ITHREAD] atapci2: AHCI called from vendor specific driver atapci2: AHCI v1.10 controller with 4 3Gbps ports, PM not supported ata4: on atapci2 ata4: [ITHREAD] ata5: on atapci2 ata5: [ITHREAD] ad8: 286168MB at ata4-master UDMA100 SATA 3Gb/s ad10: 286168MB at ata5-master UDMA100 SATA 3Gb/s ar0: 286168MB status: READY ar0: disk0 READY (master) using ad8 at ata4-master ar0: disk1 READY (mirror) using ad10 at ata5-master GEOM: ad8s1: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). GEOM: ad10s1: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). GEOM: ufsid/4bb50de139c19cf4: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). Trying to mount root from ufs:/dev/ar0s1a WARNING: ufsid/47f409368a08243c expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ufsid/4bb50de139c19cf4 expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ar0s1a expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ad10s1a expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ad8s1a expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ar0s1 expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ad10s1 expected rawoffset 0, found 63 WARNING: ad8s1 expected rawoffset 0, found 63 GEOM: ufsid/4bb50de139c19cf4c: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). GEOM: ad10s1a: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). GEOM: ad10s1c: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). GEOM: ad8s1a: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). GEOM: ad8s1c: geometry does not match label (255h,63s != 16h,63s). Under 8.2 I don't see... --->atapci2: AHCI called from vendor specific driver --->atapci2: AHCI v1.10 controller with 4 3Gbps ports, PM not supported at all, I don't see the drives, nothing It drops to the 'mountroot' prompt and when I do ? the only drive I see is the cd drive. If I boot back with to 'kernel.old' which is 8.1 Release I have no issues. Any ideas? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Best RAID setup
On Wed, Jan 26, 2011 at 1:56 AM, Don O'Neil wrote: > > I'm just looking for the most stable, and production ready RAID that can > handle at least 1 TB disks and create volumes in the 3-4 TB range. Any > thoughts, feedback, caveats, etc. are welcomed. > ZFS. You want it. -- chs, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Best RAID setup
On 26-Jan-2011, at 6:26 AM, Don O'Neil wrote: > I'm getting ready to setup a new FreeBSD 8.1 64 bit server and wanted to > know everyone's thoughts on which way to go. software RAID 5 (or 10) or > hardware RAID 5 (or 10). If you need to select between software and hardware RAID, then by all means go for hardware RAID. RAID 10 is always faster than RAID5 and the difference really stands out when writing data. > I currently have a 3Ware card in one of my servers > and it works great, but I haven't really been keeping up on what the latest > RAID support is. All RAID cards (that I have come across) support both RAID 10 and RAID5. So there is a fair chance that your card will not disappoint you. > How is the ZFS support these days? Is it production ready? ZFS is fine. I use it on my prod boxes and so far there have been no issues. > What about hardware RAID, is there a compatibility list somewhere with what > hardware (or pseudo hardware) RAID controllers are supported? Didn't get this question though. > > > > I'm just looking for the most stable, and production ready RAID that can > handle at least 1 TB disks and create volumes in the 3-4 TB range. Any > thoughts, feedback, caveats, etc. are welcomed. You need to RTFM. Thanks -- Subhro Kar Visit my Blog: http://blog.80386.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Best RAID setup
I'm getting ready to setup a new FreeBSD 8.1 64 bit server and wanted to know everyone's thoughts on which way to go. software RAID 5 (or 10) or hardware RAID 5 (or 10). I currently have a 3Ware card in one of my servers and it works great, but I haven't really been keeping up on what the latest RAID support is. How is the ZFS support these days? Is it production ready? What about hardware RAID, is there a compatibility list somewhere with what hardware (or pseudo hardware) RAID controllers are supported? I'm just looking for the most stable, and production ready RAID that can handle at least 1 TB disks and create volumes in the 3-4 TB range. Any thoughts, feedback, caveats, etc. are welcomed. Thanks! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
We are using 7. We see this in 8 as well. We see it on dual and quad core CPUs. I'm currently testing out another motherboard (different model) to see how it performs. Should know something by the end of the coming week. Troy Beisigl On Jan 7, 2011, at 9:37 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: > On 1/7/2011 9:31 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: >> Well, it did lock up today. There is no way to do anything on the console. >> The entire machine is locked hard. The errors on the console show: >> > > >> twa0: ERROR: (0x05: 0x210B): Request timed out!: request = 0xc5633430 >> twa0: INFO: (0x16: 0x1108): Resetting controller...: > > > I saw this on an i7 box running RELENG_6, but moving to 7 made all quite > stable. Are you using 6 by chance ? The box is an i7 920 > > ACPI APIC Table: > FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 4 CPUs > cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 > cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 2 > cpu2 (AP): APIC ID: 4 > cpu3 (AP): APIC ID: 6 > >---Mike > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
On 1/7/2011 9:31 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: > Well, it did lock up today. There is no way to do anything on the console. > The entire machine is locked hard. The errors on the console show: > > twa0: ERROR: (0x05: 0x210B): Request timed out!: request = 0xc5633430 > twa0: INFO: (0x16: 0x1108): Resetting controller...: I saw this on an i7 box running RELENG_6, but moving to 7 made all quite stable. Are you using 6 by chance ? The box is an i7 920 ACPI APIC Table: FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 4 CPUs cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 2 cpu2 (AP): APIC ID: 4 cpu3 (AP): APIC ID: 6 ---Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
Well, it did lock up today. There is no way to do anything on the console. The entire machine is locked hard. The errors on the console show: twa0: ERROR: (0x05: 0x210B): Request timed out!: request = 0xc5633430 twa0: INFO: (0x16: 0x1108): Resetting controller...: >From there everything is locked hard. Not even the caps/numlock keys work on >the keyboard. I would normally suspect hardware, but I can take and wipe the >drives and re-install CentOS5.4 and it will run without any issues. I would >prefer not to use Linux, but it is looking like we are going to have to if we >can't resolve the issues with these controllers and FreeBSD. Troy Beisigl > Original Message >From: Mike Tancsa >To: "Troy Beisigl" >Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >Sent: Tue, Jan 4, 2011, 8:20 AM >Subject: Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system > >On 1/4/2011 11:12 AM, Troy Beisigl wrote: >> I will have to check on its next lockup. It happens about every week to >> week and a half. > >Are you able to force the issue to recreate the problem ? > > ---Mike >___ >freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
So far, no. It just happens. The system is not that loaded. It runs 2 virtually hosted websites with SSL and that is it at the moment. Troy Beisigl On Jan 4, 2011, at 8:20 AM, Mike Tancsa wrote: On 1/4/2011 11:12 AM, Troy Beisigl wrote: I will have to check on its next lockup. It happens about every week to week and a half. Are you able to force the issue to recreate the problem ? ---Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org " ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
On 1/4/2011 11:12 AM, Troy Beisigl wrote: > I will have to check on its next lockup. It happens about every week to > week and a half. Are you able to force the issue to recreate the problem ? ---Mike ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
I will have to check on its next lockup. It happens about every week to week and a half. Troy Beisigl On Jan 3, 2011, at 8:49 PM, Mike Tancsa wrote: On 1/3/2011 9:14 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: Hi Mike, We are running the latest firmware. We upgraded to it in case this was the issue. As you can see from the log entry below, it shows the file system was not shut down cleanly because it was locked and had to be powered off. We are using Intel motherboards, so maybe something with FreeBSD and this card with the Intel motherboard? I know that this card works just fine with this board on CentOS, so... When it locks up, are you sure its the disk that locks up ? From the console, if you do a CTRL+T, what does it show its blocking on ? Are you able to build a debug kernel to see where things are stuck ? ---Mike Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> port 0xd000-0xd0ff mem 0xd000-0xd1ff, 0xd202-0xd2020fff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci1 Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: [ITHREAD] Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: WARNING: (0x04: 0x0008): Unclean shutdown detected: unit=0 Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 ports, Firmware FE9X 4.10.00.007, BIOS BE9X 4.08.00.002 Troy Beisigl Original Message From: Mike Tancsa To: "Troy Beisigl" Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Mon, Jan 3, 2011, 13:32 PM Subject: Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system I have a number of these cards and they work very well for us. What version of the firmware are you using on the card ? I have this on a busy db server. But its RELENG8. twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem 0xb000-0xb1ff,0xb400-0xb4000fff irq 19 at device 0.0 on pci12 twa0: [ITHREAD] twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 ports, Firmware FE9X 3.08.00.016, BIOS BE9X 3.08.00.004 I have had good luck with Areca cards as well, but they start in 4 port models. But really, all should work just fine with this 3ware/LSI card ---Mike On 1/3/2011 3:58 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: Hi All, We have been seeing a problem with FreeBSD 7.3 and up where the system will just hang when using a 9650SE-2LP raid card and 2 500G drives mirrored. The system will run for about a week and then the filesystem just hangs, causing the system to hang. We've looked through the logs and found nothing at all. We have changed the card and then the motherboard but the problem still exists. We have run this card with CentOS without fail in the same system configuration. If the card is not supported, can anyone recommend one that does work? Thanks, Troy Beisigl ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org " ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org " ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
On 1/3/2011 9:14 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: > Hi Mike, > > We are running the latest firmware. We upgraded to it in case this was the > issue. As you can see from the log entry below, it shows the file system was > not shut down cleanly because it was locked and had to be powered off. We are > using Intel motherboards, so maybe something with FreeBSD and this card with > the Intel motherboard? I know that this card works just fine with this board > on CentOS, so... > When it locks up, are you sure its the disk that locks up ? From the console, if you do a CTRL+T, what does it show its blocking on ? Are you able to build a debug kernel to see where things are stuck ? ---Mike > Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> > port 0xd000-0xd0ff mem 0xd000-0xd1ff,0xd202-0xd2020fff irq 16 at > device 0.0 on pci1 > Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: [ITHREAD] > Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: WARNING: (0x04: 0x0008): Unclean shutdown > detected: unit=0 > Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller > details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 ports, Firmware FE9X 4.10.00.007, BIOS BE9X > 4.08.00.002 > > Troy Beisigl > > >> Original Message >> From: Mike Tancsa >> To: "Troy Beisigl" >> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >> Sent: Mon, Jan 3, 2011, 13:32 PM >> Subject: Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system >> >> I have a number of these cards and they work very well for us. What >> version of the firmware are you using on the card ? >> >> I have this on a busy db server. But its RELENG8. >> >> twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem >> 0xb000-0xb1ff,0xb400-0xb4000fff irq 19 at device 0.0 on pci12 >> twa0: [ITHREAD] >> twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 >> ports, Firmware FE9X 3.08.00.016, BIOS BE9X 3.08.00.004 >> >> I have had good luck with Areca cards as well, but they start in 4 port >> models. But really, all should work just fine with this 3ware/LSI card >> >> ---Mike >> >> >> >> >> On 1/3/2011 3:58 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We have been seeing a problem with FreeBSD 7.3 and up where the system >>> will just hang when using a 9650SE-2LP raid card and 2 500G drives >>> mirrored. The system will run for about a week and then the filesystem >>> just hangs, causing the system to hang. We've looked through the logs >>> and found nothing at all. We have changed the card and then the >>> motherboard but the problem still exists. We have run this card with >>> CentOS without fail in the same system configuration. >>> >>> If the card is not supported, can anyone recommend one that does work? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Troy Beisigl >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ___ >>> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" >>> >>> >> >> ___ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
Hi Mike, We are running the latest firmware. We upgraded to it in case this was the issue. As you can see from the log entry below, it shows the file system was not shut down cleanly because it was locked and had to be powered off. We are using Intel motherboards, so maybe something with FreeBSD and this card with the Intel motherboard? I know that this card works just fine with this board on CentOS, so... Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> port 0xd000-0xd0ff mem 0xd000-0xd1ff,0xd202-0xd2020fff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci1 Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: [ITHREAD] Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: WARNING: (0x04: 0x0008): Unclean shutdown detected: unit=0 Dec 29 17:36:12 web01 kernel: twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 ports, Firmware FE9X 4.10.00.007, BIOS BE9X 4.08.00.002 Troy Beisigl > Original Message >From: Mike Tancsa >To: "Troy Beisigl" >Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >Sent: Mon, Jan 3, 2011, 13:32 PM >Subject: Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system > >I have a number of these cards and they work very well for us. What >version of the firmware are you using on the card ? > >I have this on a busy db server. But its RELENG8. > >twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem >0xb000-0xb1ff,0xb400-0xb4000fff irq 19 at device 0.0 on pci12 >twa0: [ITHREAD] >twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 >ports, Firmware FE9X 3.08.00.016, BIOS BE9X 3.08.00.004 > >I have had good luck with Areca cards as well, but they start in 4 port >models. But really, all should work just fine with this 3ware/LSI card > > ---Mike > > > > >On 1/3/2011 3:58 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> We have been seeing a problem with FreeBSD 7.3 and up where the system >> will just hang when using a 9650SE-2LP raid card and 2 500G drives >> mirrored. The system will run for about a week and then the filesystem >> just hangs, causing the system to hang. We've looked through the logs >> and found nothing at all. We have changed the card and then the >> motherboard but the problem still exists. We have run this card with >> CentOS without fail in the same system configuration. >> >> If the card is not supported, can anyone recommend one that does work? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Troy Beisigl >> >> >> >> >> ___ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >> "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" >> >> > >___ >freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: 9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
I have a number of these cards and they work very well for us. What version of the firmware are you using on the card ? I have this on a busy db server. But its RELENG8. twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller> port 0x1000-0x10ff mem 0xb000-0xb1ff,0xb400-0xb4000fff irq 19 at device 0.0 on pci12 twa0: [ITHREAD] twa0: INFO: (0x15: 0x1300): Controller details:: Model 9650SE-2LP, 2 ports, Firmware FE9X 3.08.00.016, BIOS BE9X 3.08.00.004 I have had good luck with Areca cards as well, but they start in 4 port models. But really, all should work just fine with this 3ware/LSI card ---Mike On 1/3/2011 3:58 PM, Troy Beisigl wrote: > Hi All, > > We have been seeing a problem with FreeBSD 7.3 and up where the system > will just hang when using a 9650SE-2LP raid card and 2 500G drives > mirrored. The system will run for about a week and then the filesystem > just hangs, causing the system to hang. We've looked through the logs > and found nothing at all. We have changed the card and then the > motherboard but the problem still exists. We have run this card with > CentOS without fail in the same system configuration. > > If the card is not supported, can anyone recommend one that does work? > > Thanks, > > Troy Beisigl > > > > > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > > ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
9650SE-2LP raid card locks system
Hi All, We have been seeing a problem with FreeBSD 7.3 and up where the system will just hang when using a 9650SE-2LP raid card and 2 500G drives mirrored. The system will run for about a week and then the filesystem just hangs, causing the system to hang. We've looked through the logs and found nothing at all. We have changed the card and then the motherboard but the problem still exists. We have run this card with CentOS without fail in the same system configuration. If the card is not supported, can anyone recommend one that does work? Thanks, Troy Beisigl ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
PCIe SAS RAID controller for FreeBSD
Hi, Could someone please recommend a 2- or 4-channel SAS PCI-e 4x RAID controller that works with 8-STABLE and is generally available? Thanks! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Splitting hw raid mirror.
Hi, Im running FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE (FreeBSD hostname 8.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE #1: Tue Dec 1 16:10:08 CET 2009 pe...@hostname:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64) and have a MTP-raidcard with a configured mirror. mpt0 Adapter: Board Name: SAS3041E Board Assembly: L3-01101-04F Chip Name: C1064E Chip Revision: UNUSED RAID Levels: RAID0, RAID1, RAID1E RAID0 Stripes: 64K RAID1E Stripes: 64K RAID0 Drives/Vol: 2-10 RAID1 Drives/Vol: 2 RAID1E Drives/Vol: 3-10 Now I want to split this mirror into standalone drives but I dont know if its possible. Since Im using zfs anyway it seems better to let zfs take care of the mirroring giving it the possibility to self heal and so on. and of course ease of administration. When consulting the manual i see this: clear Delete the entire configuration including all volumes and spares. All drives will become standalone drives. and delete volume Delete the volume volume. Member drives will become standalone drives. IF! what this does is just leave da0 as one of the disks and makes the other disk in the mirror available to the operating system as da1 then everything should be fine. But I cant take the risk if everything goes boom. :D Is there anyone that has any experience in this situation? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Raid 5 questions
Hi! I have a raid problem ... one of the subdisk is missing and i can't mount my partition. FreeBSD testhost 8.1-RELEASE FreeBSD 8.1-RELEASE #0: Mon Jul 19 02:36:49 UTC 2010 r...@mason.cse.buffalo.edu:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 # gvinum printconfig # Vinum configuration of aladar.mzperx.hu, saved at Tue Oct 5 13:06:57 2010 drive disk1 device /dev/ad4s2 drive disk2 device /dev/ad6s2 drive disk3 device /dev/ad8s2 volume user plex name user.p0 org raid5 512s vol user sd name user.p0.s1 drive disk2 len 1869638656s driveoffset 265s plex user.p0 plexoffset 512s sd name user.p0.s2 drive disk3 len 1869638656s driveoffset 265s plex user.p0 plexoffset 1024s # gvinum l 3 drives: D disk1 State: up/dev/ad4s2A: 912909/912909 MB (100%) D disk2 State: up/dev/ad6s2A: 0/912909 MB (0%) D disk3 State: up/dev/ad8s2A: 0/912909 MB (0%) 1 volume: V user State: upPlexes: 1Size:891 GB 1 plex: P user.p0R5 State: upSubdisks: 2Size:891 GB 2 subdisks: S user.p0.s1State: upD: disk2Size:891 GB S user.p0.s2State: upD: disk3Size:891 GB How can I re-add my disk ? Thanks! Aron ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD 8.x and RAID Controllers from Areca and HP
On 09/28/10 10:02, Maechler Philippe wrote: Hello all, I hope someone can help me installing FreeBSD 8.x with a RAID Controller from HP or Areca. and then the machine freezes. This happens on FreeBSD 7.3 - 8.1 (AMD64 and i386). On FreeBSD 7.2 i386 there is no problem with the areca controller. Google told me to disable the firewire and usb ports in the bios, we did that without any improvments. Try asking on hardware@ freebsd.org or stable@ freebsd.org if you don't get any replies here. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
FreeBSD 8.x and RAID Controllers from Areca and HP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello all, I hope someone can help me installing FreeBSD 8.x with a RAID Controller from HP or Areca. We have a HP Proliant DL320 G6 Server with a built in HP Smart Array Controller. Since we haven't any luck in using the raid controllers from hp we bought an Areca ARC1210 Raid Card. When we boot up from the cd the installer hangs with: run_interrupt_driven_hooks: still waiting after 60 seconds for xpt_config run_interrupt_driven_hooks: still waiting after 120 seconds for xpt_config run_interrupt_driven_hooks: still waiting after 180 seconds for xpt_config run_interrupt_driven_hooks: still waiting after 240 seconds for xpt_config run_interrupt_driven_hooks: still waiting after 300 seconds for xpt_config and then the machine freezes. This happens on FreeBSD 7.3 - 8.1 (AMD64 and i386). On FreeBSD 7.2 i386 there is no problem with the areca controller. Google told me to disable the firewire and usb ports in the bios, we did that without any improvments. Some additional information from the machine: HP Proliant DL320 G6; XEON E5505 1.87Ghz and 4GB RAM HP Smart Array B110i V1.38 Areca ARC1210 Driver Verson 1.20.00.16 2009-10-10 Areca ARC1210 Firmware Verson 1.48 2009-12-31 (we tried V1.46 before) Kind regards Philippe -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkyhoQAACgkQ22zB6cg51rORuACfS824v+t7tSZX28pd7FvIR4Op ptwAn2Gsvnm7ONLW9ABI944jXueGYkxD =IjvV -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Raid controller support
On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 11:26:23AM +0200, Kenny du Toit wrote: > Hi there > > I would like to install FReebsd with a raid controller card. Can you tell me > if these two cards are supported: > > 1. Intel RAID Controller SRCSASRB This should work with the mfi(4) driver, since it uses a 'LSI Logic 1078', according to http://www.intel.com/Products/Server/RAID-controllers/SRCSASRB/SRCSASRB-specifications.htm > 2. Promise EX 8650 According to http://www.promise.com/support/download_file.aspx?rsn=553&m=406®ion=fr-FR it should work. There are drivers available for download here: http://firstweb.promise.com/support/download/download2_eng.asp?category=all&os=100&productID=205 Latest is for 7.1, though, and it is binary only. :-( Better skip this one... Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpmmoXZghihP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Raid controller support
Hi there I would like to install FReebsd with a raid controller card. Can you tell me if these two cards are supported: 1. Intel RAID Controller SRCSASRB 2. Promise EX 8650 Regards Kenny ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: booting install DVD while hard drive is in RAID mode
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Diego Arias wrote: > > > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 9:56 AM, Andrew Gould > wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 9:01 AM, Diego Arias wrote: >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Andrew Gould >> > >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> I purchased an HP Pavilion p6510f. I cannot boot either FreeBSD 8.1 >> >> (amd64) or OpenSUSE 11.3 Gnome Live CD unless I change the hard drive >> >> mode from RAID to IDE. Unfortunately, that damages my Windows 7 >> >> installation. (The computer is currently being restored to factory >> >> state.) >> >> >> >> Is there an option I can pass to the kernel to bootup the FreeBSD >> >> installation DVD while the hard drive is in RAID mode? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> Andrew >> > >> > Do you have a RAID? >> > >> >> I don't have a RAID that I know of. The computer came with Windows 7 >> Home Premium 64 and the hard drive set to RAID in the BIOS. >> >> The computer contains only one hard drive and one DVD writer. The >> hard drive has 3 partitions: a small partition, the OS partition and >> the recovery partition. > > Do you try restoring with IDE instead of RAID? > I don't think that will work. I've read online that you have to reinstall Windows to change modes. Restoring maintains the old Windows configuration. I've been told that *Ubuntu live CD's can boot on computers with RAID mode on. That's why I was hoping that there was a kernel option I could use at bootup. Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: booting install DVD while hard drive is in RAID mode
On Thu, Jul 29, 2010 at 8:58 AM, Andrew Gould wrote: > I purchased an HP Pavilion p6510f. I cannot boot either FreeBSD 8.1 > (amd64) or OpenSUSE 11.3 Gnome Live CD unless I change the hard drive > mode from RAID to IDE. Unfortunately, that damages my Windows 7 > installation. (The computer is currently being restored to factory > state.) > > Is there an option I can pass to the kernel to bootup the FreeBSD > installation DVD while the hard drive is in RAID mode? > > Thanks, > > Andrew > ___ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to " > freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org" > Do you have a RAID? -- mmm, interesante. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
booting install DVD while hard drive is in RAID mode
I purchased an HP Pavilion p6510f. I cannot boot either FreeBSD 8.1 (amd64) or OpenSUSE 11.3 Gnome Live CD unless I change the hard drive mode from RAID to IDE. Unfortunately, that damages my Windows 7 installation. (The computer is currently being restored to factory state.) Is there an option I can pass to the kernel to bootup the FreeBSD installation DVD while the hard drive is in RAID mode? Thanks, Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Areca RAID Failure?
This isn't specifically freebsd related but I'm fishing to see if anyone has observered similar behavior from and Areca raid controller before. We're already in touch with their support... Last night a disk failed on a 7 disk raid-6 array on a ARC-1220 with 1TB WD REmumble disks. This is certainly normal enough, except that rather than taking the normal ~30 hours to rebuild array after a failure it appears to have added the spare disk directly into the array and started servicing reads from it without rebuilding it from parity! This obviously seriously scrambled the filesystem on it and sorta defeats the whole point of H/W raid in the first place. XFS recovered well enough, but most files are large enough to span a stripe and are corrupted for it. It's currently running a check and is finding lots of errors, I am optomistic that it's check routine might rebuild the data from parity but am glad this occured on a log archiving volume so it isn't a great loss and we don't have to restore from backups anyway. Anyone else seen such amazing examples of FAIL from Areca's? We've got 50 or so 3wares in production and in the past 8 years have only seen one 3ware tank - it destroyed the filesystem on it's way but also complained on the way out and wouldn't initialize since it failed its internal diags. Performance issues or not, at least they do their job. -K ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
HP ML110 G6.. Raid 0+1 nfg?
Not sure if this is supported.. Looks like the card is an HP Smart Array B110i.. But when setup as raid 0+1 in the bios.. FreeBSD 8.0 amd64 says it can not find any disks.. Anyone have this working? Thanks in advance. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: dumping a raid member with 'dd' for insurance...
Hi-- On May 11, 2010, at 3:35 PM, George Sanders wrote: > [ ... ] > I am planning on attaching each individual member of the raid5 array to a > test FreeBSD system, and run: > > dd if=/dev/ad1 of=/data/disk/image.file > > Two questions: > > - is that a complete 'dd' command, or do I need to specify "bs=xxx" and > "count=xxx" ? What you've suggested should work as-is. Adding the count option isn't useful, but specifying a bs of 64k or larger will considerably speed up the process of copying the data. Since you're dealing with a failed array and it's possible some of the disks might have errors when read, using conv=noerror might also be a good idea. > - is there any chance that simply booting with this drive attached to the > system, and running a 'dd' like this, will somehow alter the contents or > "touch" the array member in any way ? What I have described above appears to > be a completely read-only process, but I'd like to make sure there aren't ANY > bits that FreeBSD will write to this disk ... Many disks have a write-protect jumper which you can use to make sure no changes get written. Regards, -- -Chuck ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
