Re: updating arrays from 0.42 to 0.90
On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Marc Mutz wrote: > OK, so proposed way to go is: > 1.) install raidtools-0.90 (done) > 2.) d/l, compile, install 2.2.12-final (or patch a kernel) (done) > At this point I have both old and new raidtools available. But how > should I proceed? > 3a) with old kernel: init S and umount all mdx (if possible), mdstop > them and mkraid --upgrade (--force). (does this work on old kernel?) > 4a) reboot to new kernel, then re-create all with > persistent-superblock=1? > -or- > 3b) boot into new kernel -> fsck complains about zero-length partitions > (or similar) -> sulogin -> mkraid --upgrade (--force) -> exit -> done? > 4b) re-create all md's (I will have to anyway, because I just ordered > another drive that I would like to add to the array) I don't know. I was "lucky" enough to be installing RedHat 6.0 right when I started setting up RAID. I ended up saving off my /home and /etc directory and basically doing an install from scratch. If I had actually gone through the upgrade process I'd surely let you know how I did it. I can make some guesses though. I don't think you will be able to do the upgrade with the old kernel running because it has the old driver installed. So, you'd need to take the 'b' branch and 3b) boot with the new kernel. Then upgrade the raid devices. When you get your new drive you can recreate/add them to the arrays. I guess the "best" way would be to boot off a floppy or initrd that had all the 0.90 utilities available so that you could do an upgrade without having to load >anything< from the hard disk (in case you're RAIDing the root or something). Unfortunately I have no experience in creating initrd's or floppy kernels. It shouldn't be TOO hard to do though... hth, fwr
Re: updating arrays from 0.42 to 0.90
Well you're wrong at least about the man pages. In mkraid it explains the options --upgrade and --force. I think you need both in order to upgrade existing RAID arrays. Presumably you would create your /etc/raidtab to match the configuration of your existing RAID partitions, run mkraid --upgrade --force, and everything would magically be upgraded. Unfortunately I can't test this for you right now... It's my impression that it would be preferred, if at all possible, to recreate your array from scratch and restore the data from another partition or tape or whatever you have available. I don't know if the persistent superblocks would get setup during an upgrade, or if you can change stuff like the chunksize or not. Depending on how you have your old array setup it may be perferrable to recreate them... I hope you don't consider this a flame and somewhat useful... hth, fwr On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Marc Mutz wrote: > Hi out there! > > To all of you that shout for raid-0.90 into kernel 2.2.12: > > Would you please tell us how to upgrade old existing raid0/linear > devices (smoothly, IP)? > - The HOWTO that comes with the raidtools-package and the man pages say > not a word about that, > - Several posts of others asking exactly the same question were left > unanswered or received only incompetent answers. (looked at the last 2 > months) > - The proposed FAQ still seems to be missing. > > Marc > > PS: Don't flame me, _tell_ me... > > -- > Marc Mutz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>http://marc.mutz.com/ > University of Bielefeld, Dep. of Mathematics / Dep. of Physics > > PGP-keyID's: 0xd46ce9ab (RSA), 0x7ae55b9e (DSS/DH)
Re: To mailing-list administrator
Ohh, I like that! We might really need it if we ever get the 0.90 code in an "official" kernel... fwr On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Luca Berra wrote: > hello, > what about adding the line > > http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/ > > at the end of every mail that comes from the list? > > Regards, > Luca > > -- > Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Communications Media & Services S.r.l.
Re: Is the latest RAID stuff in 2.2.11-ac3 ?
The new RAID is in 2.2.12pre series. Last I heard Alan was going to send them to Linus to make the decision on whether to keep the changes in or not. I think most ppl are for keeping the changes in. I don't know about the fdset patch... fwr On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Is the latest (ie. 19990724) RAID stuff in 2.2.11-ac3 ? > > If not, what version of the RAID software does this > kernel correspond to? > > On a related issue, when will all the good stuff > like RAID and the large fdset patch make it into > the real kernel - I really need these, and they are > surely stable enough by now. > > Rich. > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Free email for life at: http://www.postmaster.co.uk/ > BiblioTech Ltd, Unit 2 Piper Centre, 50 Carnwath Road, London, SW6 3EG. > +44 171 384 6917 | Click here to play XRacer: http://xracer.annexia.org/ > --- Original message content Copyright © 1999 Richard Jones ---
Re: Status of RAID in 2.2.11
He sent me a reply email in which he indicated he would pull the 0.90 patches from 2.2.12pre before the 2.2.12 final if they continue to cause confusion. Seems that there is not enough documentation clearly stating what needs to be done if someone is using stock kernel before 2.2.12pre with raid and upgrades to a pre version. Since I think everyone on this list agrees that it would be in our best interest to keep the 0.90 patches in the 2.2.12 kernel may be someone should write up some documentation that is prominent enough to get "noticed." I'd do it myself, but I'm kinda pressed for time for the next few days... fwr On Sun, 15 Aug 1999, C. R. Oldham wrote: > "Stanley, Jeremy" wrote: > > > Supposedly support will be integrated into 2.2.12, no patch required. > > No mention of a patch for 2.2.11 yet... Someone correct me if I'm > > wrong. > > Actually, maybe I didn't send this to the list just to a previous poster, > but I discovered that Alan Cox has integrated the 0.90 patches into the > pre-2.2.12 kernels, and the pre-2.2.12 kernels are actually quite stable. > Mostly driver fixes are going in now. I'm running 2.2.12pre1 on a server at > work right now and will fire up the RAID end of that on Monday I think. > > -- > /-Charles R. (C. R.) Oldham | NCA Commission on Schools -\ > [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Arizona State University _-\ > /-V:602/965-8700 F:602/965-9423 | Tempe, AZ USA X_>-\
Re: 2.2.7 vs 2.2.10
Don't know about ac11 but I tried the proposed-2.2.11pre4 with the 2.2.10 patches. It had a bunch of failures that I checked manually. Basically, it looks like some of the chunks in the patches are integrated into pre4. I didn't find anything except these cases. Kernel compiled O.K. (gcc 2.7.2.3) and rebooted fine. Then I started compiling XFree86 3.3.4 with gcc 2.95 and started getting a lot of Oops. I think it was like: Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 3a6f2e72 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: current->tss.cr3 = 06f44000, %cr3 = 06f44000 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: *pde = Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: Oops: Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: CPU:0 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: EIP:0010:[d_lookup+101/220] Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: EFLAGS: 00010282 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: eax: 04f0 ebx: 3a6f2e5a ecx: 4e08309e edx: 4e08347f Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: esi: 8751c7b3 edi: 0001 ebp: 3a6f2e72 esp: c68b5f30 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: ds: 0018 es: 0018 ss: 0018 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: Process make (pid: 4147, process nr: 88, stackpage=c68b5000) Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: Stack: 0001 c6c9eae0 c0246d8c c6a69035 8751c7b3 000d c012f6a1 c6c9eae0 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel:c68b5f80 c68b5f80 c6a69042 c012f8e9 c6c9eae0 c68b5f80 0001 c6a69000 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel:c6a69000 0001 bfffdc78 c6a69000 c6a69035 000d 8751c7b3 c012f9c1 Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: Call Trace: [cached_lookup+21/84] [lookup_dentry+253/428] [__namei+41/92] [sys_newstat+46/148] [system_call+52/56] Aug 6 12:27:01 mammoth kernel: Code: 8b 6d 00 8b 74 24 18 39 73 48 75 eb 8b 74 24 24 39 73 0c 75 Aug 6 12:27:02 mammoth kernel: Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 3a6f2e72 So it looks like there is either a problem with pre4 or with the RAID patches on top of that. I didn't have time to mess with it so I rebooted into 2.2.10 /w RAID patches and everything has been "fine" (except for a problem with xfs in 3.3.4 that caused me to looks my X server for a while...). For reference: Personalities : [raid0] read_ahead 1024 sectors md3 : active raid0 sdb6[1] sda6[0] 755456 blocks 16k chunks md2 : active raid0 sdb5[1] sda5[0] 2098944 blocks 16k chunks md1 : active raid0 sdb3[1] sda3[0] 4196224 blocks 16k chunks md0 : active raid0 sdb1[1] sda1[0] 1574656 blocks 16k chunks unused devices: For reference: Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: md driver 0.90.0 MAX_MD_DEVS=256, MAX_REAL=12 Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: translucent personality registered Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: linear personality registered Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: raid0 personality registered Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: raid1 personality registered Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: raid5 personality registered Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: raid5: measuring checksumming speed Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: raid5: MMX detected, trying high-speed MMX checksum routines Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel:pII_mmx : 784.860 MB/sec Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel:p5_mmx: 829.056 MB/sec Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel:8regs : 602.742 MB/sec Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel:32regs: 368.808 MB/sec Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: using fastest function: p5_mmx (829.056 MB/sec) Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) found at PCI 14/0 Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) Wide Channel A, SCSI ID=7, 32/255 SCBs Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) Warning - detected auto-termination Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) Please verify driver detected settings are correct. Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) If not, then please properly set the device termination Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) in the Adaptec SCSI BIOS by hitting CTRL-A when prompted Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) during machine bootup. Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) Cables present (Int-50 NO, Int-68 NO, Ext-68 NO) Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi0) Downloading sequencer code... 374 instructions downloaded Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi1) found at PCI 14/1 Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi1) Wide Channel B, SCSI ID=7, 32/255 SCBs Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi1) Warning - detected auto-termination Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi1) Please verify driver detected settings are correct. Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi1) If not, then please properly set the device termination Aug 6 08:02:52 mammoth kernel: (scsi1) in the Adaptec SCSI BIOS by hitting CTRL-A when prompted Aug 6 08:02
Re: Lilo and Root Mirroring
On Fri, 23 Jul 1999, Brian Murphy wrote: > "Stanley, Jeremy" wrote: > > > I think the question was whether there was a way to successfully mirror > > the MBR and boot kernel onto a second drive for redundancy... > > > From: Brian Murphy[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 6:39 AM > > > To: Thomas Seidel; Linux Raid > > > Subject: Re: Lilo and Root Mirroring (was: Software Mirroring and > > > the root pa > > > > > > There is no need for all this complication. At the start of the first > > > disk create a small > > > partition /boot > > > which contains the kernel and lilo files (chain loader etc) i.e what > > > is normally in /boot. > > > > > [snip] > > Create identical partitions on the second disk (or as many as you like, > disk > space is cheap these days) and dd from the boot sector and the first two > partitions on /dev/sda, the boot and rescue to make an identical copy. > If a disk dies (and you are using SCSI) the next in line takes over > (as /dev/sda) and the system will boot from it. You dont need active > mirroring > of these partitions as the data changes infrequently. > > Brian Murphy I think some might disagree with you. What is infrequent to one person is not necessarily infrequent to others. Besides, the new filesystem tools now support mounting based on UID instead of partition name (/dev/sda1) exactly to prevent mounting the incorrect partition in the incorrect place (when a disk dies and the disk names change). RAID 1 was created to handle the automatic mirroring of filesystems. If that's what you want to do, use it. Check out the l-k mailing list, I believe T. Tso or someone made a comment yesterday or thereabouts concerning the new UID features... fwr
Re: AW: more than 16 /dev/sdx ??
Yes. If you build RAID as a module then you won't have to reboot... On Wed, 21 Jul 1999, Schackel, Fa. Integrata, ZRZ DA wrote: > Hallo Marc, > > no I've not inreased the max num of disks (didn't even know). > Do I have to rebuild the kernel? > > bye > Bernhard > > > Schackel, Fa. Integrata, ZRZ DA wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I've managed to make new SCSI devices (/dev/sdq + /dev/sdr) > > which are above > > > the 16 preconfigured /dev's. (mknod) > > > The partitions of the new devices are working. > > > > > > But by telling mdrun ... /dev/sdix .. /dev/sdqx, I get an > > 'unknown argument > > > 'dev/sdqx'' error. > > > > > > I'm still using mdtools 0.42 (shipped by SuSE). > > > Are there some limitations? > > > > > Have you increased the maximum number of raid disks per md device in > > md.h? If the above mdrun command is correct, then you want to bind 9 > > partitions together to form one md device. The normal limit is 8 IIRC. > > > > Marc > >
Re: A view from the other side...
On Thu, 08 Jul 1999, Mike Frisch wrote: > far, so good. I still don't have it shutting down properly and > automatically being brought up at boot-time, which is still a little bit > of a pain. If you're running RedHat 6.0 their /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit is wrong. It uses the old raidtools commands. Attached is my rc.sysinit. You can run diff to see the differences. Don't simply replace your rc.sysinit with mine, as you may have edited yours or I may have edited mine in other areas. Use at your own risk. Fred rc.sysinit
Re: RAID under 2.2.10
On Tue, 06 Jul 1999, Christoph Martin wrote: > You can apply the 2.2.6 patches to 2.2.10. But it is not working > correctly. Normal operation is ok, but if a raid comes out of sync and > need a resync (like when you reboot without a proper shutdown), this > would fail. > > I have a 2.2.10 with 2.2.6 raid patches running at the moment, because > I need 2.2.10 to get Informix IDS running. But when the machine > crashed I had to boot my old 2.2.6 to get the rebuild done and then > reboot with 2.2.10 for Informix. > > Ingo Molnar talked about working on the patches for 2.2.10 and that he > fixed the problem with resync, but he did not yet release the code. > > Christoph So If you're only using RAID0, which you can not rebuild and has no syncing, then the 2.2.6 patches applied to 2.2.10 provide tested, production quality RAID? I will take a backup before proceeding, but I would also like to get concensus from linux-raid participants and particularly Ingo... Fred
Re: Raid-1 Red Hat 6.0 problem at boot
Just a guess, but do you need an alias for md-personality-3 in your /etc/conf.modules? I do know that RedHat screwed up /etc/rc.d/rc.sysinit in 6.0 - they left in the old raid startup methods (what was it raidadd or something?). You might need to modify that file also... fwr - Original Message - From: Rlas Kotowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 5:31 PM Subject: Raid-1 Red Hat 6.0 problem at boot > Hi, > > I just installed Raid Level-1, it seems to run fine, I can start it, mount > it, transfer files, etc.. > > however, the riad gets autodetected, started and the STOPPED at boot time, > after the entire boot process is over and I'm logged in I can start and > mount it manually, but for whatever I try it won't be mounted at boot > time, here is the the log of the message: > > ay 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: autorun ... > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: considering sdb3 ... > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: adding sdb3 ... > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: adding sda3 ... > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: created md0 > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: bind > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: bind > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: running: > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: now! > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: sdb3's event counter: 0002 > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: sda3's event counter: 0002 > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: kmod: failed to exec /sbin/modprobe -s -k > md-personality-3, errno = 2 > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: do_md_run() returned -22 > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: unbind > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: export_rdev(sdb3) > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: unbind > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: export_rdev(sda3) > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: md0 stopped. > May 28 14:44:41 narixa kernel: ... autorun DONE. > > > I'm very frustrated since I can't figure this out, any help would be > apreciated, thank you very much in advance. > > Ralf R. Kotowski > > >
Re: Raid mirroring with Linux 6.0?
Only "solution" I've found is to boot up in single user mode and copy stuff so that you free up partitions. Then you could make your raid device, format it, mount it, and copy stuff back. Depending on the layout and size of you partitions this could be extremely easy or extremely hard. fwr - Original Message - From: Chris Palazzolo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, May 28, 1999 5:58 PM Subject: Raid mirroring with Linux 6.0? > Hi, > > I'm trying to mirror two drives (/dev/hda & /dev/hdb) to a /dev/md0 array in > Linux 6.0. > > The OS is currently on /dev/hda and is running fine. My question is, how > can I create a RAID mirror set without losing the data? I've obvioulsy got > your e-mail from the "-force" option and wanted to see if anyone else has > come across this. > > This should be a common occurrence/question since the newer Linux supports > mirroring. > > Any help would be nice - even a place to go for help on this matter... > > Thanks, > > Chris Palazzolo > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Re: patches for 2.2.9 - THANKS
I'd like to say thanks to everyone who responded to my questions about the raid patches for 2.2.9. It appears that the server was down - also effecting the Linux-kernel list - late Sunday/early Monday. I finally got all your responses! Looks like I will search for the patch from Ingo in the Archives, or use the one provided by Mike Black (probably get both and compare the two!). I did have some questions for RedHat, if they are listening, that maybe someone here can address also. 1) Is it possible to upgrade an old version of raid storage to the new? Since I was lucky enough to have a tape backup, I was able to wipe out my old raid array and start from scratch. RedHat didn't give any directions or info on how to upgrade, but I think I found something under mkraid (--upgrade option). The note that "this option should be used with care" doesn't give me a good feeling though. 2) Is there any work to integrate raid setup into the install process (disk druid may be)? Unless you can do this, it's kind of difficult to do an install. I had to install on an IDE drive and then boot up in single user mode, make my raid devices, copy over the data, and reboot hoping everything would work (it did). So the question to be asked is, why would RedHat be concerned what version of raid driver was in the kernel if they make it so difficult to do an install on a raid device? Thanks again for your help, and I look forward to the time when the new raid "alpha" is rolled into the stable kernel tree for good. Hopefully this will be soon, as a major distributor has included it in their version of the kernel... Fred
patches for 2.2.9?
This is a two part message. First, I need to check to see if I'm on the list.. Second, where can I get patches for the alpha raid tools that RedHat chose to put in their version of the kernel that will work under 2.2.9? The latest official alpha patches appear to be for 2.2.6. Most of the patches appear to be successful, with a large percentage having offsets, some with fuzz, and one failing (fs.h at that!). Without checking each patch and trying to figure out what I can do with the reject (which I have not done yet), I don't feel comfortable even trying to boot up on the 2.2.9 kernel /w raid patches. Unfortunately, I've formatted all but my root partition with the new raid tools and kernel patches. It would be a royal pain to move back down to the version in the official kernel (although that would probably be safer). As a side note, does anyone know why the hell RedHat put alpha patches in their production release? Out of curiosity, did they ask anyone on this mailing list for an opinion, or was it a unilateral decision? Curious minds want to know -fwr
