What is the rationale for running sw raid0 over hw raid0,
using a single hw raid controller? I don't quite see why
it should be superior to the all-hw solution.
Now, if you have multiple hw raid controllers, or if you have
anemic controllers and want to do sw raid5 over hw raid0,
or something lik
>Gadi Oxman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Even if we do not survive the failure, the redundancy that RAID provides
>is still valuable. On the next boot after the failure, we will be able
>to continue working in degraded mode with the working drives.
>
No i cant afford System hanging. I m uising raid
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, James Manning wrote:
backwards this time. dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rd/c0d{0,1} bs=512 count=100
what's /dev/rd/? devfs or a RAID controller?
my CPU util is still insanely high for a 4-way Xeon and
are you running the bonnies in singleuser? if so cpu util will nearly
al
Dropping each of the 2 channels down to 4 drives started dropping
the performance...barely. I'm still getting 99.6% CPU util on s/w
raid0 over 2 h/w raid0's scares me, but I'll try the HZ and NR_STRIPES
settings later on. I'm getting worried I'm not bottlenecking on anything
scsi-related at all
> > There is a way to preserve the data on the existing disk. Go, and fetch the
> > latest Software-RAID HowTo.
> > http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/
>
> I couldn't find that part on the RAID-HOWTO. Could you send it to me?
Since it's not really referred to in the RAID-1 section (a
On 18-Aug-99 Gerardo Muñoz Martin wrote:
> How can I set up RAID-1 under root (/) partition if it's mounted?
>
Go and fetch the latest Software-RAID HowTo. I did it as the author tells, and
everything worked well.
URL:http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/
---
Christian Ordig
Hello,
>From past messages I've gotten the feeling that some people consider
2.2.10 unstable just as 2.2.9, with the corrupt filesystem issue. Does
anyone here have experience with 2.2.10 enough to know its stable, or
is anyone firm on the idea that its unstable? None of the previous
e-mails
How can I set up RAID-1 under root (/) partition if it's mounted?
--
Linux is user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends are.
Gerardo Muñoz Martinmailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Umbral Global, S.A. de C.V.
http://www.umbral.com
Tel. +(52) 5251-5121 ext. 49F
> There is a way to preserve the data on the existing disk. Go, and fetch the
> latest Software-RAID HowTo.
> http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/
I couldn't find that part on the RAID-HOWTO. Could you send it to me?
--
Linux is user friendly. It's just selective about who its friends
Sorry that i ask this off-topic question, but i thought because there
are a lot of people on this list who really know linux you could perhaps
help me:
The problem is with the PTYs:
on using autopasswd [which i really need] i get the following error:
/usr/bin/autopasswd gietl xxx
spawn passw
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1999 09:18:00 -0400 (EDT)
From: James Manning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
FWIW, the eXtremeRAID 1100 cards are 64-bit PCI only (as are the ServeRAID
cards in my previous testing). Other testing I've done has shown many
situations where even our quad P6/200 machines (PC Serv
it would be quite nice if this sort of information could be included in
a Raid-Tuning FAQ or somesuch thing.
-stephen
Gadi Oxman wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Gadi Oxman wrote:
>
> > I'd recommend verifying if the following changes affect the s/w
> > raid-5 performance:
> >
> > 1.A kerne
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, Gadi Oxman wrote:
> I'd recommend verifying if the following changes affect the s/w
> raid-5 performance:
>
> 1.A kernel compiled with HZ=1024 instead of HZ=100 -- this
> will decrease the latency between "i/o submitted to the raid
> layer" and "i/o submitted
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, James Manning wrote:
> > I missed the start of this thread, so I don't know what RAID level you're
> > using. I did some RAID-0 tests with the new Linux RAID code back in March
> > on a dual 450Mhz Xeon box. Throughput on a single LVD bus appears to peak
> > at abou
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, James Manning wrote:
> > > > input output random
> > > > MB/s %cpu MB/s %cpu /s %cpu
> > > >
> > > > 1drive-jbod 19.45 16.3 17.99 16.4 153.90 4.0
> > > > raid0 48.49 42.1 25.48 23.1 431.00 7.4
> > > > raid01
On 18 Aug 1999, Ziber wrote:
> But the problem is Raid isnt working in this manner. It try hard to access
> faulty device and after giving some errors system just hanged. In my case i m
> using Samba to access the Raid. and if i m copying data to raid and pull the
> power cable after some period
> Again your %cpu is high compared to what I've seen. I've never seen
> anything at 99%. Anyone else?
My s/w raid5 CPU util has always been between 99 and 100% for writes.
If some kind soul could help me figure out kernel profiling, I'll
profile 2.2.12 doing block s/w raid5 writes.
James
--
M
Markus Gustavsson wrote:
>
> Hello.
>
> I've been using RAID for some months with the RAID patch you offer from
>pub/linux/damons/raid/alpha
> on the kernel mirrors. I use the on boot raid superblock autodetection and I like it
>much. I think
> it's very good working. However, I like to upgrad
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On a related issue, when will all the good stuff like RAID and the
> large fdset patch make it into the real kernel - I really need these,
> and they are surely stable enough by now.
The large fdset patch won't go in until Linus is happy with it, ho
On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 12:57:06PM -0400, James Manning wrote:
> Whoa... I think I've had "input" and "output" switched in their
> correlation to file reading and file writing... What worries me
> about that is this result from a previous post:
>
> - On partitions(?), s/w raid0 over 2 h/w raid0'
Hi,
i want to add a new metadevice /dev/md3. In /var/log/messages i find :
.. kernel: md: 08.21: invalid raid superblock magic (0) on block
4233088
what does it mean? Problem is, i cant mdrun /dev/md3 , because there are an
error message: invalid argument. /dev/md3 was build with mdcr
Oh yah,
Alan, the tulip drivers stopped functioning correctly for me in 2.2.12. I
have a gut feeling it's not a kernel issue but I havn't had a chance to beat
on it.
Basicly description:
Patched a freshly extracted 2.2.11 w/ 2.2.12-final patch. copied my
/boot/config-2.2.11-smp from my previous
Was playing w/ 2.2.12-final last night in alan's 2.2.12pre releases and it
appears to fully support the newer raid source.
--
Mark Ferrell : [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is the latest (ie. 19990724) RAID stuff in 2.2.11-ac3 ?
>
> If not, what version of the RAID software does
> > > input output random
> > > MB/s %cpu MB/s %cpu /s %cpu
> > >
> > > 1drive-jbod 19.45 16.3 17.99 16.4 153.90 4.0
> > > raid0 48.49 42.1 25.48 23.1 431.00 7.4
> > > raid01 53.23 41.4 21.22 19.0 313.10 9.5
> > > raid5
On Wed, Aug 18, 1999 at 12:18:05PM -0400, James Manning wrote:
> > input output random
> > MB/s %cpu MB/s %cpu /s %cpu
> >
> > 1drive-jbod 19.45 16.3 17.99 16.4 153.90 4.0
> > raid0 48.49 42.1 25.48 23.1 431.00 7.4
> > raid01
> So in most cases you wrote data much faster than writing it?
Ummm... s/writing/reading/;
:)
James
> input output random
> MB/s %cpu MB/s %cpu /s %cpu
>
> 1drive-jbod 19.45 16.3 17.99 16.4 153.90 4.0
> raid0 48.49 42.1 25.48 23.1 431.00 7.4
> raid01 53.23 41.4 21.22 19.0 313.10 9.5
> raid5 52.47 39.3 21.35 19.8 3
I've been following these threads on sw raid over hw raid, etc., with
some curiosity. I also did testing with a Mylex DAC1164P, in my case
using 8 IBM Ultrastar 18ZX drives (1rpm).
I get the following bonnie results on that system, just using hw raid,
for sequential input, sequential output,
On 18-Aug-99 James Manning wrote:
> Speaking of which, something I didn't quite get is why a "chunk-size"
> was defined for raid1... Since they're mirrors, what's a chunk size
> mean in raid1?
Yes, RAID1 is a mirror, so a chink size cannot increase write speed, but when
reading this can be done "
> > Side question... I noticed that the KNI stuff was stripped going into
> > 2.2.11-ac3 (rightly so), so is 2.2.12 going to be a target to get all
> > the KNI stuff working? or perhaps somewhere in .12-acX?
>
> Probably 2.3
So the current s/w raid stuff will end up migrating into 2.3.x
as well?
> Side question... I noticed that the KNI stuff was stripped going into
> 2.2.11-ac3 (rightly so), so is 2.2.12 going to be a target to get all
> the KNI stuff working? or perhaps somewhere in .12-acX?
Probably 2.3
Alan
> I think so too. We have in the past been prepared to do this sort of
> stuff. 2.2.11 did it with ISDN and I heard few moans, 2.2 at some point
> needs to do this with the knfsd update.
Side question... I noticed that the KNI stuff was stripped going into
2.2.11-ac3 (rightly so), so is 2.2.12 g
> On an Intel architecture machine you'll never get more than about 80MBs
> regardless of the number of SCSI busses or the speed of the disks. The
> PCI bus becomes a bottleneck at this point.
>
> Another consideration of course. But I think his problem was that he
> couldn't get any highe
The new RAID is in 2.2.12pre series. Last I heard Alan was going to
send them to Linus to make the decision on whether to keep the changes
in or not. I think most ppl are for keeping the changes in. I don't
know about the fdset patch...
fwr
On Wed, 18 Aug 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is
Is the latest (ie. 19990724) RAID stuff in 2.2.11-ac3 ?
If not, what version of the RAID software does this
kernel correspond to?
On a related issue, when will all the good stuff
like RAID and the large fdset patch make it into
the real kernel - I really need these, and they are
surely stable e
> > I have a running system that I would like to put into raid1. However,
> > what I have read is that the mkraid command would erase everything. Is
> > this true? Will I loose my data that I have, or is it only the second
> > disk that bites it.
>
> There is a way to preserve the data on the exi
Hi,
On Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:38:20 -0700, Carlos Hwa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> I have a 2 disk raid0 with 32k chunk size using raidtools 0.90 beta10
> right now, and have applied stephen tweedie's raw i/o patch. the raw io
> patch works fine with a single disk but if i try to use raw io on
> /de
Hi,
Can anyone recommend UK hardware suppliers who will
preconfigure RAID for Linux?
We are looking to purchase a Linux system for use as a
web-server for a lightly loade internet / intranet site,
which is being redeveloped as a database-backed site
(apache/mod_perl/MySQL).
We initially app
But the problem is Raid isnt working in this manner. It try hard to access
faulty device and after giving some errors system just hanged. In my case i m
using Samba to access the Raid. and if i m copying data to raid and pull the
power cable after some period my samba connection lost and linuxbox
Like Luca says, don't use HTML in mails to this list.
> Hi. I'm seting up RAID-1 in a server with two IDE 4.3GB hard
> disks. I'm using RedHat 5.2 with kernel 2.2.9.
First problem. raidtools-0.90 doesn't work with 2.2.8 and 2.2.9. You don't want
to use these kernels anyway, because of the filesy
Hello,
On Tue, 17 Aug 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 17, 1999 at 04:18:27AM -0600, Ziber wrote:
> > Hello,
> > I am is facing problem in Raid.
> > I have created Raid1 on 500Mb partitions on sda5 and sdb5. For testing purpose
> > i disconnect power
> >
> > from sdb while copying d
41 matches
Mail list logo
