On Sat, 26 May 2012 18:39:08 +0400 Michael Tokarev m...@tls.msk.ru wrote:
Neil, can you comment on the change to Monitor offered
in the mentioned bugreport please?
On 12.04.2012 23:28, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Neil, re http://bugs.debian.org/658701 , how do you think,
is it okay if mdadm
Neil, can you comment on the change to Monitor offered
in the mentioned bugreport please?
On 12.04.2012 23:28, Michael Tokarev wrote:
Neil, re http://bugs.debian.org/658701 , how do you think,
is it okay if mdadm --monitor will send email in case check
found mismatches, the same way it sends
Neil, re http://bugs.debian.org/658701 , how do you think,
is it okay if mdadm --monitor will send email in case check
found mismatches, the same way it sends email about other
more critical errors?
I think Russell has a good point here, but there's one more
source of mismatches we have in kernel
On 05.02.2012 19:40, Michael Tokarev wrote:
On 05.02.2012 18:58, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012, Michael Tokarev m...@tls.msk.ru wrote:
[]
And second, more to the point, Neil gave a very good writeup of these
checks and repairs of raid arrays, about deciding which part/component of
Package: mdadm
Version: 3.2.3-2
Severity: important
Feb 5 22:55:09 xev mdadm[20730]: RebuildFinished event detected on md device
/dev/md0, component device mismatches found: 20608 (on raid level 1)
When a check initiated by /etc/cron.d/mdadm finds an error mdadm will discover
this and log an
On 05.02.2012 16:34, Russell Coker wrote:
Package: mdadm
Version: 3.2.3-2
Severity: important
Feb 5 22:55:09 xev mdadm[20730]: RebuildFinished event detected on md device
/dev/md0, component device mismatches found: 20608 (on raid level 1)
When a check initiated by /etc/cron.d/mdadm
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012, Michael Tokarev m...@tls.msk.ru wrote:
I believe that this is a serious bug, it seems to me that one of the most
significant conditions it can encounter that should be immediately
reported to the sysadmin is the fact that the contents of disks are
changing and breaking
On 05.02.2012 18:58, Russell Coker wrote:
On Mon, 6 Feb 2012, Michael Tokarev m...@tls.msk.ru wrote:
I believe that this is a serious bug, it seems to me that one of the most
significant conditions it can encounter that should be immediately
reported to the sysadmin is the fact that the
8 matches
Mail list logo