On Jan 9, 2014, at 6:31 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
Jim, my point was that IF the drive does not successfully resolve the bad
block issue and btrfs takes a write failure every time it attempts to
overwrite the bad data, it is not going to remap that data, but rather it is
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:13:09 -0700
Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 6:31 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
Jim, my point was that IF the drive does not successfully resolve the bad
block issue and btrfs takes a write failure every time it
On 01/14/2014 11:13 AM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 6:31 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
Jim, my point was that IF the drive does not successfully resolve the bad block
issue and btrfs takes a write failure every time it attempts to overwrite the
bad data, it is not
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:29:28 -0800
George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
what we are lacking at this point is a SMART capability to provide
visual notifications to the user when any hard drive starts to seriously
degrade or suddenly fails.
You can configure smartd (from smartmontools)
On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.net wrote:
I vaguely remember having some drives that were not able to remap a single
block on write, but doing that successfully if I overwrote a sizable area
around (and including) that block, or overwrite the whole drive. And after
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:00:21AM +0600, Roman Mamedov wrote:
That said, do not fall into a false sense of security relying on proprietary,
barely if ever updated after the device has been shipped, and often very
peculiar-behaving SMART routines inside the black-box HDD firmware as your
most
On Jan 14, 2014, at 1:29 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
Chris, Please don't misunderstand me. I am not advocating that btrfs or any
other filesystem should be dealing with bad blocks. I believe very strongly
that if the drive firmware can't deal with that transparently
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:05:11 -0700
Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.net wrote:
I vaguely remember having some drives that were not able to remap a single
block on write, but doing that successfully if I overwrote a
On Jan 14, 2014, at 2:06 PM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 03:00:21AM +0600, Roman Mamedov wrote:
That said, do not fall into a false sense of security relying on proprietary,
barely if ever updated after the device has been shipped, and often very
On 01/14/2014 01:00 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:29:28 -0800
George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
what we are lacking at this point is a SMART capability to provide
visual notifications to the user when any hard drive starts to seriously
degrade or suddenly fails.
You
On 01/14/2014 01:00 PM, Roman Mamedov wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 12:29:28 -0800
George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
what we are lacking at this point is a SMART capability to provide
visual notifications to the user when any hard drive starts to seriously
degrade or suddenly fails.
You
On Jan 14, 2014, at 2:19 PM, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.net wrote:
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:05:11 -0700
Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
On Jan 14, 2014, at 12:37 PM, Roman Mamedov r...@romanrm.net wrote:
I vaguely remember having some drives that were not able to remap a
On Jan 14, 2014, at 2:37 PM, Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
I've seen that happen on OS X Server (client doesn't produce SMART warnings
in user space).
Oops. It does, just not automatically, it seems you have to go look for this in
Disk Utility.
Chris Murphy
--
To unsubscribe
On 01/14/2014 01:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 14, 2014, at 1:29 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
And the key to monitoring hard drive health, in my opinion, is SMART and what
we are lacking at this point is a SMART capability to provide visual
notifications to the user when
On 01/14/2014 01:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 14, 2014, at 1:29 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
And the key to monitoring hard drive health, in my opinion, is SMART and what
we are lacking at this point is a SMART capability to provide visual
notifications to the user when
On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 14:37:46 -0700
Chris Murphy li...@colorremedies.com wrote:
Reserve sectors are fundamental to ECC. If there are no more reserves, the
status should be a failed drive, it can no longer do its own relocation of
data experiencing transient read errors in this case.
With the
On 01/14/2014 01:14 PM, Chris Murphy wrote:
And the key to monitoring hard drive health, in my opinion, is SMART and what
we are lacking at this point is a SMART capability to provide visual
notifications to the user when any hard drive starts to seriously degrade or
suddenly fails.
Gnome
George Eleftheriou posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:49:48 +0100 as excerpted:
I'm really looking forward to the day that typing:
mkfs.btrfs -d raid10 -m raid10 /dev/sd[abcd]
will do exactly what is expected to do. A true RAID10 resilient in 2
disks' failure. Simple and beautiful.
We're
On 01/10/2014 07:27 AM, Duncan wrote:
George Eleftheriou posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 17:49:48 +0100 as excerpted:
I'm really looking forward to the day that typing:
mkfs.btrfs -d raid10 -m raid10 /dev/sd[abcd]
will do exactly what is expected to do. A true RAID10 resilient in 2
disks'
Chris Murphy posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 11:52:08 -0700 as excerpted:
Understood. I'm considering a 2nd drive dying during rebuild (from a 1st
drive dying) as essentially simultaneous failures. And in the case of
raid10, the likelihood of a 2nd drive failure being the lonesome drive
in a
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media which proved to be horribly unreliable.
A 32GB microSDHC card reported bad blocks after 4 days, while a usb
pen drive returns bogus data without any warning at all.
So I wonder, how would btrfs
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media which proved to be horribly unreliable.
A 32GB microSDHC card reported bad blocks after 4 days, while a usb
pen drive returns
Hugo Mills posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:42:47 + as excerpted:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media which proved to be horribly unreliable.
A 32GB microSDHC
On 2014-01-09 07:41, Duncan wrote:
Hugo Mills posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:42:47 + as excerpted:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media which proved to be
On Thu, 2014-01-09 at 12:41 +, Duncan wrote:
Hugo Mills posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:42:47 + as excerpted:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media
Austin S Hemmelgarn posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 07:52:44 -0500 as
excerpted:
On 2014-01-09 07:41, Duncan wrote:
Hugo Mills posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 10:42:47 + as excerpted:
If a [btrfs ]block is read and fails its checksum, then the other
copy (in RAID-1) is checked and used if it's
Duncan,
As a silent reader of this list (for almost a year)...
As an anonymous supporter of the BAARF (Battle Against Any RAID
Four/Five/Six/ Z etc...) initiative...
I can only break my silence and applaud your frequent interventions
referring to N-Way mirroring (searching the list for the
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 05:49:48PM +0100, George Eleftheriou wrote:
Duncan,
As a silent reader of this list (for almost a year)...
As an anonymous supporter of the BAARF (Battle Against Any RAID
Four/Five/Six/ Z etc...) initiative...
I can only break my silence and applaud your frequent
On Jan 9, 2014, at 9:49 AM, George Eleftheriou ele...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm really looking forward to the day that typing:
mkfs.btrfs -d raid10 -m raid10 /dev/sd[abcd]
will do exactly what is expected to do. A true RAID10 resilient in 2
disks' failure. Simple and beautiful.
How is a
On Jan 9, 2014, at 5:52 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
Just a thought, you might consider running btrfs on top of LVM in the
interim, it isn't quite as efficient as btrfs by itself, but it does
allow N-way mirroring (and the efficiency is much better now that they
have
claiming that RAID-10 (with 2-way mirroring) is guaranteed to survive
an arbitrary 2-device failure is incorrect.
Yes, you are right. I didn't mean any 2 devices. I should have
added from different mirrors :)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-btrfs in
the body
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 06:34:23PM +0100, George Eleftheriou wrote:
claiming that RAID-10 (with 2-way mirroring) is guaranteed to survive
an arbitrary 2-device failure is incorrect.
Yes, you are right. I didn't mean any 2 devices. I should have
added from different mirrors :)
If you
How is a resilient 2 disk failure possible with four disk raid10?
__ ___ RAID0
__|__ __|__ ___ RAID1
| || |
AB CD
Loosing A+C / A+D / B+C / B+D is resilient.
Loosing A+B or C+D is catastrophic.
Sorry, it's my fault. In my urge to praise
On Jan 9, 2014, at 5:41 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Having checksumming is good, and a second
copy in case one fails the checksum is nice, but what if they BOTH do?
I'd love to have the choice of (at least) three-way-mirroring, as for me
that seems the best practical hassle/cost
On 2014-01-09 12:31, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 5:52 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn
ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
Just a thought, you might consider running btrfs on top of LVM in
the interim, it isn't quite as efficient as btrfs by itself, but
it does allow N-way mirroring (and the
On 2014-01-09 13:08, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 5:41 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Having checksumming is good, and a second
copy in case one fails the checksum is nice, but what if they BOTH do?
I'd love to have the choice of (at least) three-way-mirroring, as for me
On Jan 9, 2014, at 3:42 AM, Hugo Mills h...@carfax.org.uk wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media which proved to be horribly unreliable.
A 32GB microSDHC
Thanks Hugo,
Since:
-- i keep daily backups
-- all 4 devices are of the same size
I think I can test it (as soon as I have some time to spend in the
transition to BTRFS) and verify your assumptions (...and get my wish)
If you have an even number of devices and all the devices are the
On Jan 9, 2014, at 11:22 AM, Austin S Hemmelgarn ahferro...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2014-01-09 13:08, Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 5:41 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Having checksumming is good, and a second
copy in case one fails the checksum is nice, but what if they BOTH
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:40:20 -0700 Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 3:42 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of, one write every 10s)
workloads on cheap flash media which proved to be
On Jan 9, 2014, at 12:13 PM, Kyle Gates kylega...@hotmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:40:20 -0700 Chris Murphy wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014, at 3:42 AM, Hugo Mills wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:26:26AM +0100, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi,
I am running write-intensive (well sort of,
I really suspect a lot of bad block issues can be avoided by monitoring
SMART data. SMART is working very well for me with btrfs formatted
drives. SMART will detect when sectors silently fail and as those
failures accumulate, SMART will warn in an obvious way that the drive in
question is at
Hi George,
I really suspect a lot of bad block issues can be avoided by monitoring
SMART data. SMART is working very well for me with btrfs formatted drives.
SMART will detect when sectors silently fail and as those failures
accumulate, SMART will warn in an obvious way that the drive in
Hello Clemens,
On 01/09/2014 04:08 PM, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
Hi George,
I really suspect a lot of bad block issues can be avoided by monitoring
SMART data. SMART is working very well for me with btrfs formatted drives.
SMART will detect when sectors silently fail and as those failures
On 01/09/2014 05:06 PM, Jim Salter wrote:
On Jan 9, 2014 7:46 PM, George Mitchell geo...@chinilu.com wrote:
I would prefer that the drive, even flash media type, would
catch and resolve write failures. If it doesn't happen at the hardware
layer, according to how I understand Hugo's answer,
45 matches
Mail list logo
