On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're investigating the possibility of running Linux (RHEL) on top of
Sun's X4500 Thumper box:
http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/
Basically, it's a server with 48 SATA hard drives. No hardware RAID.
Hi,
I'm thinking of slowly replacing disks in my raid5 array with bigger
disks and then resize the array to fill up the new disks. Is this
possible? Basically I would like to go from:
3 x 500gig RAID5 to 3 x 1tb RAID5, thereby going from 1tb to 2tb of
storage.
It seems like it should be, but...
On Wednesday December 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm thinking of slowly replacing disks in my raid5 array with bigger
disks and then resize the array to fill up the new disks. Is this
possible? Basically I would like to go from:
3 x 500gig RAID5 to 3 x 1tb RAID5, thereby going from
Hi
I would like to use raidtools-1.00.3 on Rhel5 distribution
but I got thie error
Could you tell me if a new version is available or if a patch exists
to use raidtools on Rhel5
Thanks for your answer
Thierry
gcc -O2 -Wall -DMD_VERSION=\raidtools-1.00.3\ -c -o rrc_common.o
rrc_common.c
Thierry Iceta wrote:
Hi
I would like to use raidtools-1.00.3 on Rhel5 distribution
but I got thie error
Use mdadm instead. Raidtools is dangerous/unsafe, and is
not maintained for a long time already.
/mjt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-raid in
the body of
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 10:59:41PM +1100, Neil Brown wrote:
On Wednesday December 19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm thinking of slowly replacing disks in my raid5 array with bigger
disks and then resize the array to fill up the new disks. Is this
possible? Basically I would like to
Guy Watkins wrote:
} -Original Message-
} From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:linux-raid-
} [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brendan Conoboy
} Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 3:36 PM
} To: Norman Elton
} Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
} Subject: Re: Raid over 48 disks
}
} Norman Elton wrote:
The (up to) 30% percent figure is mentioned here:
http://insights.oetiker.ch/linux/raidoptimization.html
On http://forums.storagereview.net/index.php?showtopic=25786:
This user writes about the problem:
XP, and virtually every O/S and partitioning software of XP's day, by default
places the
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
Performance of the raw device is fair:
# dd if=/dev/md2 of=/dev/zero bs=128k count=64k
8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 15.6071 seconds, 550 MB/s
Somewhat less through ext3 (created with -E stride=64):
# dd if=largetestfile of=/dev/zero bs=128k count=64k
8589934592 bytes
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Thiemo Nagel wrote:
Performance of the raw device is fair:
# dd if=/dev/md2 of=/dev/zero bs=128k count=64k
8589934592 bytes (8.6 GB) copied, 15.6071 seconds, 550 MB/s
Somewhat less through ext3 (created with -E stride=64):
# dd if=largetestfile
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote:
--
Now to my setup / question:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 150.0 GB, 150039945216 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 18241 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk identifier: 0x5667c24a
Device Boot Start
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote:
--
Now to my setup / question:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 150.0 GB, 150039945216 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 18241 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes
Disk
On 12/19/07, Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
From that setup it seems simple, scrap the partition table and use the
disk device for raid. This is what we do for all data storage disks (hw
raid)
and sw raid members.
/Mattias
Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Neil Brown wrote:
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We're investigating the possibility of running Linux (RHEL) on top of
Sun's X4500 Thumper box:
http://www.sun.com/servers/x64/x4500/
Basically, it's a server with 48 SATA hard
Thierry Iceta wrote:
Hi
I would like to use raidtools-1.00.3 on Rhel5 distribution
but I got thie error
Could you tell me if a new version is available or if a patch exists
to use raidtools on Rhel5
raidtools is old and unmaintained. Use mdadm.
--
Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Woe unto
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Jon Nelson wrote:
On 12/19/07, Justin Piszcz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
From that setup it seems simple, scrap the partition table and use the
disk device for raid. This is what we do for all data storage disks (hw raid)
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote:
--
Now to my setup / question:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 150.0 GB, 150039945216 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 18241 cylinders
Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote:
--
Now to my setup / question:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 150.0 GB, 150039945216 bytes
255 heads, 63 sectors/track,
On 12/19/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As other posts have detailed, putting the partition on a 64k aligned
boundary can address the performance problems. However, a poor choice of
chunk size, cache_buffer size, or just random i/o in small sizes can eat
up a lot of the benefit.
On 12/19/07, Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As other posts have detailed, putting the partition on a 64k aligned
boundary can address the performance problems. However, a poor choice of
chunk size, cache_buffer size, or just random i/o in small sizes can eat
up a lot of the benefit.
So I was trying to copy over some Indiana Jones wav files and it
wasn't going my way. I noticed that my software raid device showed:
/dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
Is this saying that it was remounted, read only because it found a
problem with the md1 meta device? That's what
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Jon Sabo wrote:
So I was trying to copy over some Indiana Jones wav files and it
wasn't going my way. I noticed that my software raid device showed:
/dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
Is this saying that it was remounted, read only because it found a
I found the problem. The power was unplugged from the drive. The
sata power connectors aren't very good at securing the connector. I
reattached the power connector to the sata drive and booted up. This
is what it looks like now:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/illsci# mdadm --detail /dev/md0
Jon Sabo wrote:
So I was trying to copy over some Indiana Jones wav files and it
wasn't going my way. I noticed that my software raid device showed:
/dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
Is this saying that it was remounted, read only because it found a
problem with the md1 meta
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote:
--
Now to my setup / question:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk /dev/sdc: 150.0 GB, 150039945216 bytes
255 heads,
We'll here's the rest of the info I should have sent in the last email:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/illsci# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [multipath] [raid1]
md1 : active raid1 sdb2[1]
974808064 blocks [2/1] [_U]
md0 : active raid1 sda1[0]
1951744 blocks [2/1] [U_]
unused devices:
I think I got it now. Thanks for your help!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/home/illsci# mdadm --detail /dev/md0
/dev/md0:
Version : 00.90.03
Creation Time : Mon Jul 30 21:47:14 2007
Raid Level : raid1
Array Size : 1951744 (1906.32 MiB 1998.59 MB)
Device Size : 1951744 (1906.32 MiB
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Jon Sabo wrote:
I found the problem. The power was unplugged from the drive. The
sata power connectors aren't very good at securing the connector. I
reattached the power connector to the sata drive and booted up. This
is what it looks like now:
[EMAIL
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
Justin Piszcz wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Mattias Wadenstein wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Justin Piszcz wrote:
--
Now to my setup / question:
# fdisk -l /dev/sdc
Disk
- Message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
- Message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
Nagilum said: (by the date of Tue, 18 Dec 2007 11:09:38 +0100)
Ok, I've recreated the problem in form of a semiautomatic testcase.
All necessary files (plus the old xfs_repair output) are at:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Bill Davidsen wrote:
I'm going to try another approach, I'll describe it when I get results (or
not).
http://home.comcast.net/~jpiszcz/align_vs_noalign/
Hardly any difference at whatsoever, only on the per char for read/write
is it any faster..?
Average of 3 runs
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 01:18:21PM -0500, Jon Sabo wrote:
So I was trying to copy over some Indiana Jones wav files and it
wasn't going my way. I noticed that my software raid device showed:
/dev/md1 on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
Is this saying that it was remounted, read only
On Wed Dec 19, 2007 at 09:50:16AM -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
The (up to) 30% percent figure is mentioned here:
http://insights.oetiker.ch/linux/raidoptimization.html
That looks to be referring to partitioning a RAID device - this'll only
apply to hardware RAID or partitionable software RAID,
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007, Robin Hill wrote:
On Wed Dec 19, 2007 at 09:50:16AM -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
The (up to) 30% percent figure is mentioned here:
http://insights.oetiker.ch/linux/raidoptimization.html
That looks to be referring to partitioning a RAID device - this'll only
apply to
On 12/19/07, Michal Soltys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Justin Piszcz wrote:
Or is there a better way to do this, does parted handle this situation
better?
What is the best (and correct) way to calculate stripe-alignment on the
RAID5 device itself?
Does this also apply to Linux/SW
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This just happened to me.
Create raid with:
mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=3
--spare-devices=0 --layout=o2 /dev/sdb3 /dev/sdc3 /dev/sdd3
cat /proc/mdstat
md2 : active raid10 sdd3[2] sdc3[1] sdb3[0]
5855424
On 12/19/07, Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This just happened to me.
Create raid with:
mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=3
--spare-devices=0 --layout=o2 /dev/sdb3 /dev/sdc3 /dev/sdd3
cat /proc/mdstat
md2
On 12/19/07, Jon Nelson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/19/07, Neil Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday December 18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This just happened to me.
Create raid with:
mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=3
--spare-devices=0 --layout=o2
38 matches
Mail list logo
