Re: New features?
Thanks for this Neil, good to know that most of what I would like is already available. I think your reply highlights what I almost put in there as my first priority: documentation, specifically a HOWTO. I believe that 2.6.18 has SATA hot-swap, so this should be available know ... providing you can find out what commands to use. Exactly! 2 Adding new disks to arrays. Allows incremental upgrades and to take advantage of the hard disk equivalent of Moore's law. Works for raid5 and linear. Raid6 one day. Am I misinterpreting the mdadm 2.5 man pages when it says: Grow (or shrink) an array, or otherwise reshape it in some way. Currently supported growth options including changing the active size of component devices in RAID level 1/4/5/6 and changing the number of active devices in RAID1. 3. RAID level conversion (1 to 5, 5 to 6, with single-disk to RAID 1 a lower priority). A single disk is large than a RAID1 built from it, so this is non-trivial. What exactly do you want to do there. Single to disk is less important, but adding a third disk to a RAID1 pair to make a RAID5 would be nice as would be adding one or more disks to a RAID5 to make a RAID6. John - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Two-disk RAID5?
Sorry, I couldn't find a diplomatic way to say you're completely wrong. We don't necessarily expect a diplomatic way, but a clear and intelligent one would be helpful. In two-disk RAID5 which is it? 1) The 'parity bit' is the same as the datum. 2) The parity bit is the complement of the datum. 3) It doesn't work at a bit-wise level. Many of us feel that RAID5 looks like: parity = data[0]; for (i=1; i ndisks; ++i) parity ^= data[i]; which implies (1). It could easily be (2) but merely saying it's not data, it's parity doesn't clarify matters a great deal. But I'm pleased my question has stirred up such controversy! John - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: RAID-related: SATA disk removal?
Your error output looks just like what I got on my screen when I just removed the disk. Did you try removing it from the arrays first? Basically warm-swap. Google suggests one or two people have tried it. John - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
RAID-related: SATA disk removal?
I am testing a machine with two SATA drives in startech.com removable caddies. Everything including swap is RAID1. (I'm running x86_64 Scientific Linux 4.2, a RedHat enterprise clone.) Informal tests suggest that pulling out an active disk causes the whole machine to hang up but removing a disk from the RAID arrays and pulling it out gives the message: nv_sata: Primary device removed and everything happily keeps running. Is this a fair description? In practise do people find that following the above allows a failed disk to be replaced without shutting down the machine? Thanks John - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: Re[2]: Concept problem with RAID1?
A much nicer way to get that sort of reliability would be for RAID6 to periodically scan the blocks on the device and to use the extra information to do ECC (and for RAID5 to at tell syslog). John - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
