Re: product testimonials
Notice that it checks every 3 seconds, but emails every 10 minutes (prevents the inbox from filling up overnight). What does it look like when a drive dies? I presume something like: [..UD] Then, perhaps just doing a (Perl) regexp: if (/\[[^\]]*D[^\]]*\]/) then report the failure? what I've seen is that it looks like this: [UU_UU] until the drive is marked as dead. and then it changes to: [UUDUU] (I believe) I'd want to know about the _ until otherwise noted. and I'd want to be able to touch and ignore file so if its rebuilding I don't hear about it every few minutes. I'll see what I can hack up. it wouldn't be a bad idea to put a few of these up on a raid-related website so people could see their options. -sv
failed disks
Hi, I'm doing a series of bonnie tests along with a fair amount of file md5summing to determine speed and reliability of a raid5 configuration. I have 5 drives on a TekRam 390U2W adapter. 3 of the drives are the same seagate barracuda 9.1 gig drive. The other two are the 18 gig barracuda's. Two of the nine gigs fail - consistently - when I run bonnie tests on them. One will get flagged as bad in one run and die out. This one I can confirm is bad b/c it fails on its own outside of the raid array (it fails to be detected by linux at all - no partitions are found and it can't be started) - the other passes a badblocks -w test and appears to work. However it ALWAYS fails when its a part of the array and a bonnie test is run. Does this sound like a hardware fault? If so why is it only occurring when raid is used? thanks -sv
Re: failed disks
On Tue, 21 Mar 2000, Seth Vidal wrote:
Hi,
I'm doing a series of bonnie tests along with a fair amount of file
md5summing to determine speed and reliability of a raid5 configuration.
I have 5 drives on a TekRam 390U2W adapter. 3 of the drives are the same
seagate barracuda 9.1 gig drive. The other two are the 18 gig barracuda's.
Two of the nine gigs fail - consistently - when I run bonnie tests on
them. One will get flagged as bad in one run and die out. This one I can
confirm is bad b/c it fails on its own outside of the raid array (it
fails to be detected by linux at all - no partitions are found and it
can't be started) - the other passes a badblocks -w test and appears to
work. However it ALWAYS fails when its a part of the array and a bonnie
test is run.
Does this sound like a hardware fault? If so why is it only occurring when
raid is used?
You can most likely trigger it too if you run non-RAID I/O on all the disks
simultaneously.
It sounds like you have a SCSI bus problem, bad cabling / termination etc.
--
: [EMAIL PROTECTED] : And I see the elder races, :
:.: putrid forms of man:
: Jakob Østergaard : See him rise and claim the earth, :
:OZ9ABN : his downfall is at hand. :
:.:{Konkhra}...:
not finding extra partitions
I had my raid5 up and running with 3 15g ide disks. I shutdown and removed the cable from one drive and rebooted for a test. All seemed to go well, system ran in degraded mode. When I reconnected drive, only 1 of the 3 partitions on the drive are recognized. 2 of my 3 /dev/md- arrays still run in degraded mode. How can I force a "good" partition so the array will rebuild? -- --- +-+ | Douglas EganWind River | | Sr. Staff Engineer | | Tel : 847-837-1530| | Fax : 847-949-1368| | HTTP : http://www.windriver.com| | Email : [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +-+
RAID 0.90+ status for 2.4 (pre) ??
I myself really need working RAID(1) code, but current 2.3.99 kernels don't even have compilable RAID1 code in them :-( Any change for raid-code keepers to get their act together and publish something working ? Or must I simply reinstall my development machines without RAID ? I myself can't update missing LFS bits into the current kernel unless I get something bootable (and usable) for my machines. /Matti Aarnio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
