On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Neil Brown wrote:
>
> There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
> 2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
> I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
> really problem that is very reproducable.
>
> The
On Mon, 22 Jan 2001, Neil Brown wrote:
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really problem that is very reproducable.
The problem is
Neil Brown wrote:
>
> There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
> 2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
> I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
> really problem that is very reproducable.
>
> The problem is that parity
On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> I've attached Holger's testcase (ext2, SMP, raid5)
> boot with "mem=64M" and run the attached script.
> The script creates and deletes 9 directories with 10.000 in each dir.
> Neil, could you run it? I don't have an raid 5 array - SMP+ext2 without
>
We'll test and get back to you.
Hans
Neil Brown wrote:
>
> There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
> 2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
> I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
> really problem that is very
We'll test and get back to you.
Hans
Neil Brown wrote:
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really problem that is very reproducable.
On Sun, 21 Jan 2001, Manfred Spraul wrote:
I've attached Holger's testcase (ext2, SMP, raid5)
boot with "mem=64M" and run the attached script.
The script creates and deletes 9 directories with 10.000 in each dir.
Neil, could you run it? I don't have an raid 5 array - SMP+ext2 without
Neil Brown wrote:
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really problem that is very reproducable.
The problem is that parity can be
On Monday January 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> > There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
> > 2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
> > I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
>
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
> 2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
> I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
> really problem that is very reproducable.
Do you know
I've attached Holger's testcase (ext2, SMP, raid5)
boot with "mem=64M" and run the attached script.
The script creates and deletes 9 directories with 10.000 in each dir.
Neil, could you run it? I don't have an raid 5 array - SMP+ext2 without
raid5 is ok.
Holger, what's your ext2 block size, and
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really problem that is very reproducable.
The problem is that parity can be calculated wrongly when
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really problem that is very reproducable.
The problem is that parity can be calculated wrongly when
I've attached Holger's testcase (ext2, SMP, raid5)
boot with "mem=64M" and run the attached script.
The script creates and deletes 9 directories with 10.000 in each dir.
Neil, could you run it? I don't have an raid 5 array - SMP+ext2 without
raid5 is ok.
Holger, what's your ext2 block size, and
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really problem that is very reproducable.
Do you know if it
On Monday January 22, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote:
There have been assorted reports of filesystem corruption on raid5 in
2.4.0, and I have finally got a patch - see below.
I don't know if it addresses everybody's problems, but it fixed a very
really
16 matches
Mail list logo
