On Feb 10 2008 12:27, David Greaves wrote:
>>
>> I do not see anything wrong by specifying the SB location as a metadata
>> version. Why should not location be an element of the raid type?
>> It's fine the way it is IMHO. (Just the default is not :)
>
>There was quite a discussion about it.
>
>Fo
On Feb 10 2008 10:34, David Greaves wrote:
>Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Jan 29 2008 18:08, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>>
>>>> IIRC there was a discussion a while back on renaming mdadm options
>>>> (google "Time to deprecate old RAID formats?") and t
On Jan 29 2008 18:08, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> IIRC there was a discussion a while back on renaming mdadm options
>> (google "Time to deprecate old RAID formats?") and the superblocks
>> to emphasise the location and data structure. Would it be good to
>> introduce the new names at the same time a
On Jan 28 2008 18:19, David Greaves wrote:
>Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> This makes 1.0 the default sb type for new arrays.
>>
>
>IIRC there was a discussion a while back on renaming mdadm options
>(google "Time to deprecate old RAID formats?") and the superblocks
&
This makes 1.0 the default sb type for new arrays.
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
Create.c |6 --
super0.c |4 +---
super1.c |2 +-
3 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
Index: mdadm-2.6.4/Cr
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/md/md.c |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/md/md.c b/drivers/md/md.c
index cef9ebd..6295b90 100644
--- a/drivers/md/md.c
+++ b/drivers/md/md.c
@@ -5033,7 +5033,7 @@ static int md_se
On Dec 7 2007 07:30, Nix wrote:
>On 6 Dec 2007, Jan Engelhardt verbalised:
>> On Dec 5 2007 19:29, Nix wrote:
>>>> On Dec 1 2007 06:19, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> RAID1, 0.90.03 superblocks (in order to be compatible with LILO, if
>&g
On Dec 5 2007 19:29, Nix wrote:
>>
>> On Dec 1 2007 06:19, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>
>>> RAID1, 0.90.03 superblocks (in order to be compatible with LILO, if
>>> you use 1.x superblocks with LILO you can't boot)
>>
>> Says who? (Don't use LILO ;-)
>
>Well, your kernels must be on a 0.90-superblocked
On Dec 1 2007 07:12, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> On Sat, 1 Dec 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>> On Dec 1 2007 06:19, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>>
>> > RAID1, 0.90.03 superblocks (in order to be compatible with LILO, if
>> > you use 1.x superblocks with LILO you can't
On Dec 1 2007 06:26, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> I ran the following:
>
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdc
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdd
> dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sde
>
> (as it is always a very good idea to do this with any new disk)
Why would you care about what's on the disk? fdisk, mkfs and
the day-to-
On Dec 1 2007 06:19, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> RAID1, 0.90.03 superblocks (in order to be compatible with LILO, if
> you use 1.x superblocks with LILO you can't boot)
Says who? (Don't use LILO ;-)
>, and then:
>
> /dev/sda1+sdb1 <-> /dev/md0 <-> swap
> /dev/sda2+sdb2 <-> /dev/md1 <-> /boot (ext3)
Hi,
a while back I reported a bug for 2.6.21 where creating an MD raid array
with internal bitmap on a sparc64 system does not work. I have not yet
heard back (or I forget); has this been addressed yet?
(mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l 1 -n 2 -e 1.0 -b internal /dev/ram[01])
thanks,
Jan
On Aug 28 2007 06:08, Michael Evans wrote:
>
>Oh, I see. I forgot about the changelogs. I'd send out version 5
>now, but I'm not sure what kernel version to make the patch against.
>2.6.23-rc4 is on kernel.org and I don't see any git snapshots.
2.6.23-rc4 is a snapshot in itself, a tagged one a
On Aug 26 2007 04:51, Michael J. Evans wrote:
> {
>- if (dev_cnt >= 0 && dev_cnt < 127)
>- detected_devices[dev_cnt++] = dev;
>+ struct detected_devices_node *node_detected_dev;
>+ node_detected_dev = kzalloc(sizeof(*node_detected_dev), GFP_KERNEL);\
What's the \ good
On Aug 12 2007 20:21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> per the message below MD (or DM) would need to be modified to work
> reasonably well with one of the disk components being over an
> unreliable link (like a network link)
Does not dm-multipath do something like that?
> are the MD/DM maintainers
On Aug 12 2007 09:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> now, I am not an expert on either option, but three are a couple things that I
> would question about the DRDB+MD option
>
> 1. when the remote machine is down, how does MD deal with it for reads and
> writes?
I suppose it kicks the drive and you
On Aug 12 2007 13:35, Al Boldi wrote:
>Lars Ellenberg wrote:
>> meanwhile, please, anyone interessted,
>> the drbd paper for LinuxConf Eu 2007 is finalized.
>> http://www.drbd.org/fileadmin/drbd/publications/
>> drbd8.linux-conf.eu.2007.pdf
>>
>> but it does give a good overview about what DRBD ac
On Jul 20 2007 07:35, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 20, 2007 at 08:13:03AM +0300, Al Boldi wrote:
>> As always, a good friend of mine managed to scratch my partion table by
>> cat'ing /dev/full into /dev/sda. I was able to push him out of the way, but
>> at least the first 100MB are gone.
On Jun 15 2007 14:10, Avi Kivity wrote:
>
>Some things are not achievable with block-level raid. For example, with
>redundancy integrated into the filesystem, you can have three copies for
>metadata, two copies for small files, and parity blocks for large files,
>effectively using different raid
Hi,
RAID levels 0 and 4 do not seem to like the -b internal. Is this
intentional? Runs 2.6.20.2 on i586.
(BTW, do you already have a PAGE_SIZE=8K fix?)
14:47 ichi:/dev # mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l 4 -e 1.0 -b internal -n 2 /dev/ram[01]
mdadm: RUN_ARRAY failed: Input/output error
mdadm: stopped /dev/m
On May 31 2007 09:00, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> >
>>
>> Hardly, with all the Fedora specific cruft. Anyway, there was a
>> simple patch posted in RH bugzilla, so I've gone with that.
>>
> I'm not sure what Fedora has to do with it,
I like highly modularized systems. And that requires an initramf
On May 31 2007 09:09, Neil Brown wrote:
>> >> the following command strangely gives -EIO ...
>> >> 12:27 sun:~ # mdadm -C /dev/md4 -l 1 -n 2 -e 1.0 -b internal /dev/ram0
>> >> missing
>> >> Where could I start looking?
>> >>
>> >> Linux sun 2.6.21-1.3149.al3.8smp #3 SMP Wed May 30 09:43:00 CEST
On May 30 2007 16:35, Bill Davidsen wrote:
>> On 29 May 2007, Jan Engelhardt uttered the following:
>> > from your post at
>> > http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-raid@vger.kernel.org/msg07384.html I
>> > read that autodetecting arrays with a 1.x superblock is curr
On May 30 2007 22:05, Neil Brown wrote:
>>
>> the following command strangely gives -EIO ...
>> 12:27 sun:~ # mdadm -C /dev/md4 -l 1 -n 2 -e 1.0 -b internal /dev/ram0
>> missing
>>
>> md: md4: raid array is not clean -- starting background reconstruction
>> md4: failed to create bitmap (-5)
>>
Hi,
the following command strangely gives -EIO ...
12:27 sun:~ # mdadm -C /dev/md4 -l 1 -n 2 -e 1.0 -b internal /dev/ram0
missing
md: md4: raid array is not clean -- starting background reconstruction
md4: failed to create bitmap (-5)
md: pers->run() failed ...
mdadm: RUN_ARRAY failed: Input/ou
On May 26 2007 15:50, David Miller wrote:
>> >
>> >> Kernel is kernel-smp-2.6.16-1.2128sp4.sparc64.rpm from Aurora Corona.
>> >> Perhaps it helps, otherwise hold your breath until I reproduce it.
>> >
>> >Jan, if you can reproduce this with the current 2.6.20 vanilla
>> >kernel I'd be very interes
Hi,
from your post at
http://www.mail-archive.com/linux-raid@vger.kernel.org/msg07384.html I
read that autodetecting arrays with a 1.x superblock is currently
impossible. Does it at least work to force the kernel to always assume a
1.x sb? There are some 'broken' distros out there that still
On Apr 12 2007 14:26, David Miller wrote:
>
>> Kernel is kernel-smp-2.6.16-1.2128sp4.sparc64.rpm from Aurora Corona.
>> Perhaps it helps, otherwise hold your breath until I reproduce it.
>
>Jan, if you can reproduce this with the current 2.6.20 vanilla
>kernel I'd be very interested in a full trac
On May 9 2007 15:38, Jens Axboe wrote:
>> I am a mdadm/disk/hard drive fanatic, I was curious:
>>
>> >On i386, we can at most fit 256 scatterlist elements into a page,
>> >and on x86-64 we are stuck with 128. So that puts us somewhere
>> >between 512kb and 1024kb for a single IO.
>>
>> How come 3
On May 9 2007 18:51, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>(But Andrew never saw your email, I suspect: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is probably
>some strange mixup of Andrew Morton and Andi Kleen in your mind ;)
What do the letters kp stand for?
Jan
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsub
On May 10 2007 20:04, Neil Brown wrote:
>> >- if ((curr_events - rdev->last_events + 4096) > 8192) {
>> >+ if ((long)curr_events - (long)rdev->last_events > 4096) {
>> >rdev->last_events = curr_events;
>> >idle = 0;
>> >}
>>
On May 10 2007 16:22, NeilBrown wrote:
>
>diff .prev/drivers/md/md.c ./drivers/md/md.c
>--- .prev/drivers/md/md.c 2007-05-10 15:51:54.0 +1000
>+++ ./drivers/md/md.c 2007-05-10 16:05:10.0 +1000
>@@ -5095,7 +5095,7 @@ static int is_mddev_idle(mddev_t *mddev)
>*
On Apr 30 2007 13:54, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>But then the array needs to keep track of where data is so that it knows
>what is "good" and what is "bad."
I assume it knows that, because you can reboot while an array is still
syncing and it Does The Right Thing. Furthermore, there is also the
On Apr 30 2007 11:19, Dan Williams wrote:
>>
>> when a user does `mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l -n
>> `, the array gets rebuilt for at least RAID1 and RAID5, even if
>> the disk contents are most likely not of importance (otherwise we would
>> not be creating a raid array right now). Could not this need
Hi list,
when a user does `mdadm -C /dev/md0 -l -n
`, the array gets rebuilt for at least RAID1 and RAID5, even if
the disk contents are most likely not of importance (otherwise we would
not be creating a raid array right now). Could not this needless resync
be skipped - what do you think?
Change Kconfig objects from "menu, config" into "menuconfig" so
that the user can disable the whole feature without having to
enter the menu first.
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
drivers/md/Kconfig | 15 +--
1 file changed, 5 i
On Apr 12 2007 14:26, David Miller wrote:
>From: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2007 02:15:57 +0200 (MEST)
>
>> Kernel is kernel-smp-2.6.16-1.2128sp4.sparc64.rpm from Aurora Corona.
>> Perhaps it helps, otherwise hold your breath until I repro
Use menuconfigs instead of menus, so the whole menu can be disabled at
once instead of going through all options.
Signed-off-by: Jan Engelhardt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Index: linux-2.6.21-rc5/drivers/md/Kconfig
===
---
Hi,
just when I did
# mdadm -C /dev/md2 -b internal -e 1.0 -l 10 -n 4 /dev/sd[cdef]4
(created)
# mdadm -D /dev/md2
Killed
dmesg filled up with a kernel oops. A few seconds later, the box
locked solid. Since I was only in by ssh and there is not (yet) any
possibility to reset it remotely, this is
Hello list,
normally, I'd think that combining drives into a raid1 array would give
me at least a little improvement in read speed. In my setup however,
this does not seem to be the case.
14:16 opteron:/var/log # hdparm -t /dev/sda
Timing buffered disk reads: 170 MB in 3.01 seconds = 56.52
On Mar 10 2007 12:21, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Neil Brown wrote:
>>
>> If I wanted to reshape a raid0, I would just morph it into a raid4
>> with a missing parity drive, then use the raid5 code to restripe it.
>> Then morph it back to regular raid0.
>
> Wow, that made my brain hurt.
>
> Given the
On Mar 7 2007 10:20, dean gaudet wrote:
>>> http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Install_on_Software_RAID#Write-intent_bitmap
>>
>> That information has been extremely useful. Thanks a
>> lot. I fund a command to do the bitmap internal after
>> the array was made so I added that. Seems like some of
>> th
On Feb 23 2007 06:41, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
> I was able to Alt-SysRQ+b but I could not access the console/X/etc, it
> appeared
> to be frozen.
No sysrq+t? (Ah, unblanking might hang.) Well, netconsole/serial to the rescue,
then ;-)
Jan
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
On Feb 22 2007 06:59, Neil Brown wrote:
>On Wednesday February 21, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> are there any plans to support reshaping
>> on raid0 and raid10?
>>
>
>No concrete plans. It largely depends on time and motivation.
>I expect that the various flavours of raid5/raid6 reshape will
Hello,
are there any plans to support reshaping
on raid0 and raid10?
Jan
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Hi,
this line in mdadm-2.5.4
Detail.c:
185: ioctl(fd, GET_BITMAP_FILE, &bmf) == 0 &&
causes a dmesg warning when running `mdadm -D /dev/md0`:
ioctl32(mdadm:2946): Unknown cmd fd(7) cmd(5915){10} arg(ff2905d0)
on /dev/md0
on Aurora Linux corona_2.90 with 2.6.18-1.2798.al3.1smp(sparc64).
if ((bits & (1<+ ret |= bdi_congested(&q->backing_dev_info,
>bits);
>+ else
>+ ret &= bdi_congested(&q->backing_dev_info,
>bits);
>+ }
>+ }
>+ rcu_
>> Why we're updating it BACKWARD in the first place?
>
>To avoid writing to spares when it isn't needed - some people want
>their spare drives to go to sleep.
That sounds a little dangerous. What if it decrements below 0?
Jan Engelhardt
--
-
To unsubscribe from
On Jul 11 2006 12:03, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>Subject: Raid5 Reshape Status + xfs_growfs = Success! (2.6.17.3)
Now we just need shrink-reshaping and xfs_shrinkfs... :)
Jan Engelhardt
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a mess
t locations on the device, either
at the end (for 1.0), at the start (for 1.1) or 4K from
the start (for 1.2).
No 0.91 :(
(My mdadm is 2.2, but the problem remains in 2.5.2)
Jan Engelhardt
--
sec
>
> It is working, thanks!
>
Hm, what's superblock 0.91? It is not mentioned in mdadm.8.
Jan Engelhardt
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
don't MD and DM merge some bits?
>
>Which bits?
>Why?
>
>My current opinion is that you should:
>
> Use md for raid1, raid5, raid6 - anything with redundancy.
> Use dm for multipath, crypto, linear, LVM, snapshot
There are pairs of files that look like they wou
>personally, I think this this useful functionality, but my personal
>preference is that this would be in DM/LVM2 rather than MD. but given
>Neil is the MD author/maintainer, I can see why he'd prefer to do it in
>MD. :)
Why don't MD and DM merge some bits?
J
53 matches
Mail list logo
