I guess i was not clear enough.
i am using raid5 over 3 maxtor disks. the chunk size is 1MB.
i mesured the io coming from one disk alone when I READ
from it with 1MB buffers , and i know that it is ~32MB/s.
I created raid0 over two disks and my throughput grown to
64 MB/s.
Doing the same thing w
Lorac Thelmwood wrote:
Seatools is a DOS based tool. It doesn't matter what OS you have. It
just examines the drives themselves, not the filesystem. It is used
to check if your drives are bad.
FYI, seatools package is available for linux too, linux version can
be found at the same place on s
1. do you want the code ?
2. I managed to gain linear perfromance with raid5.
it seems that both raid 5 and raid 0 are caching read a head buffers.
raid 5 cached small amount of read a head while raid0 did not.
On 1/4/06, JaniD++ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> - Original Message -
> "Lorac" == Lorac Thelmwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
Lorac> First I can't start the array because it complains about a bad
Lorac> superblock.
Have you tried forcing the start of the array with the --force flag?
Something like this:
mdadm -A --run /dev/md1
Please give the outp
Interesting paper, thanks. Unfortunately, decode bandwidth
when erasures are present (e.g. drives have failed) is not
discussed. This is by far the speed bottleneck for Reed-Solomon
and a potential hangup for a RS personality in md.
Jeff
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe
On Dec 6, 2005, Andre Noll wrote:
Don't we need /dev/console as well?
About the example script:
==
#!/bin/sh
echo 'Auto-assembling boot md array'
mkdir /proc
mount -t proc proc /proc
if [ -n "$rootuuid" ]
then arg=--uuid=$rootuuid
elif [ -n "$mdmino
"David M. Strang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> I'm not very initrd savvy; and I'm having a heck of a time making the
> initramfs instructions in mdadm work. Does anyone have a working example
> of them?
[...]
> I've added a /dev directory to the init.cpio.gz as well. It seems like I
> ma
On 1/4/06, Lorac Thelmwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> failed to RUN_ARRAY /dev/md1: Invalid argument
>
>
> I don't think it will start even whe the reconstruction is complete to
> due to that bad superblock
>
> On 1/4/06, John Stoffel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > "Lorac" == Lorac Thelmwoo
On Mon, 2 Jan 2006 00:26:58 +0100, JaniD++ wrote
> Hello, list,
>
> I found something interesting when i try to create a brand new array
> on brand new drives
>
> 5. The question
>
> Why shows sdh2 as spare?
> The MD array size is correct.
> And i really can see, the all drive is reading
