root-filesystem as raid

hi, i want to build my rootfilesystem as raid1on /dev/md0. how can i boot from /dev/md0? i use kernel 2.0.36. what are releasenr. of mdtools i should use. thanx. olaf ihmig [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: was: swapping to file doesn't work: swapon hangs ....

** Sorry this is with corect e-mail address!! * Hi apropos of swap file on RAID array 1) for HA we need to put swap file on "something" like RAID 1 2) on the same way for the critical

Re: 4 cheetah-3's pretty much saturate 80MB/sec channel

My hw raid results are just one controller. You aren't measuring throughput when the controller is busy doing background raid initialization, are you? That would hurt performance. Nope... before running bonnie, I make sure the drives are *totally* idle. That's another benefit to only

Re: 4 cheetah-3's pretty much saturate 80MB/sec channel

it also depends on the load. if bonnie is the only real load on the machine then cpu util will be 99%. james: does it affect responsiveness? and if you run a couple of other cpu hogging processes (eg rc5des at normal nice level), does bonnie's cpu util go down? and does it affect results.

RE: Autostart failing.

If the array does not have persistent superblocks is there a way I can create them without destroying the data? No. Best bet: backup the data on the array, and then recreate it with "persistent-superblock 1" this time. WAIT!! I thought there was a procedure that would convert the

To mailing-list administrator

hello, what about adding the line http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/ at the end of every mail that comes from the list? Regards, Luca -- Luca Berra -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Communications Media Services S.r.l.

Re: To mailing-list administrator

Ohh, I like that! We might really need it if we ever get the 0.90 code in an "official" kernel... fwr On Fri, 20 Aug 1999, Luca Berra wrote: hello, what about adding the line http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/ at the end of every mail that comes from the list? Regards,

Re: To mailing-list administrator

Luca Berra wrote: hello, what about adding the line http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/ at the end of every mail that comes from the list? Why just the HOWTO? Why not a link to a main page with the Documentation, downloads, and instructions for HOW TO UNSUBSCRIBE.

Re: To mailing-list administrator

probably a good idea... blue-skying i noticed on kernel traffic the other day that linus has been really pissed at the ISDN ppl for not sending in regular, smaller patches and wanting to slip by with a giant merge. could it be that linus is keeping the raid 0.90 stuff out for the same reason that

h/w vs. h/w+s/w

Since the 4 Cheetah-3's per channel (nearly) saturate the bus (by the leveling off in performance), I decided to re-test the DAC1164P don't all-h/w on those 4+4 drives since it should be less to keep up with than the 10+10 from before all_hw_4+4 ---Sequential Output

Re: AW: raidstop; raidstart fails

"Schackel, Fa. Integrata, ZRZ DA" wrote: Hi, after I applied the raid0145-19990421-2.2.6 patch to my new downloaded kernel(2.2.10 from kernel.org) I wanted to raise the max devices of a md in md.h. But md.h was 0 bytes. I don't think it's ok ?!? include/linux/md.h has moved to

updating arrays from 0.42 to 0.90

Hi out there! To all of you that shout for raid-0.90 into kernel 2.2.12: Would you please tell us how to upgrade old existing raid0/linear devices (smoothly, IP)? - The HOWTO that comes with the raidtools-package and the man pages say not a word about that, - Several posts of others asking

Re: updating arrays from 0.42 to 0.90

Well you're wrong at least about the man pages. In mkraid it explains the options --upgrade and --force. I think you need both in order to upgrade existing RAID arrays. Presumably you would create your /etc/raidtab to match the configuration of your existing RAID partitions, run mkraid

Re: h/w vs. h/w+s/w

I believe you concluded that since 10+10 drives didn't get much better performance than 4+4 drives, that the SCSI bus was being nearly saturated by 4 drives. My experience is that 8 drives on 1 bus wasn't much worse than 3+3+2 drives on 3 busses. On that basis, I concluded that SCSI bus

RE: Autostart failing.

WAIT!! I thought there was a procedure that would convert the OLD raid partitions for prior tool sets to the NEW ones with a persistant superblock. Did I not understand correctly?? But from what I understood from the previous message, this is an array created with the latest

Re: updating arrays from 0.42 to 0.90

Fred Reimer wrote: Well you're wrong at least about the man pages. In mkraid it explains the options --upgrade and --force. interrupted Well, "explains" is a little bit too much said, but yes, it is there. I think you need both in order to upgrade existing RAID arrays. Presumably you

Re: h/w vs. h/w+s/w

I believe you concluded that since 10+10 drives didn't get much better performance than 4+4 drives, that the SCSI bus was being nearly saturated by 4 drives. My experience is that 8 drives on 1 bus wasn't much worse than 3+3+2 drives on 3 busses. On that basis, I concluded that SCSI bus

Re: updating arrays from 0.42 to 0.90

hi marc To all of you that shout for raid-0.90 into kernel 2.2.12: Would you please tell us how to upgrade old existing raid0/linear devices (smoothly, IP)? when I tried out our old raid drives with linux-2.2.10...it wouldn;t recognize it so I compiled raid-0.42 under 2.2.10 and still

Re: h/w vs. h/w+s/w

On Fri, Aug 20, 1999 at 07:09:06PM -0400, James Manning wrote: hw_raid0_4+4 ---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU