On Sun, Nov 28, 1999 at 06:37:46PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 28 Nov, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[clip]
If the controller is built right, there is some potential for a performance
increase. The idea is to have more than one drive simultaneously reading
into it's buffer (they run
On Sun, Nov 28, 1999 at 05:55:24PM +, Darren Nickerson wrote:
...
Thanks for the reply Jakob. :-P I used to be the same . . . now I'm bitter and
twisted. Well, mebbe just twisted.
;)
...
How ``bad'' is the performance ?
It was at one point about 4MB/s . . . I nuked that kernel
Lyndon David schrieb:
Hi,
I am working with the 2.2.13 kernel to set up a very simple situation where the
partitions
are just mirrored across two ide disks raid1.
which version of raid do you use? the 2.2.13 includes as i can remember
0.36 of raid and
on
Jason Clifford schrieb:
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Thomas Stegbauer wrote:
which version of raid do you use? the 2.2.13 includes as i can remember
0.36 of raid and
on ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/raid/alpha are only
0.90-patches for 2.2.11 which does not
apply to 2.2.13 :-(
Exec summary: will raid1 code cause read error sectors to be re-vectored ?
Full gory details:
I am having problems with some new disks, in that sectors are going bad.
I kind of didn't expect this on `new' disks, but maybe I'm just not used to
having so many sectors !
So far, the problems
is there a way to hatadd a spare to a running raid5?
markus
--
Digital Online Media GmbH
(we like to be called DOM)
Bismarck Str. 60
50672 Köln
phone: +49 221 951680
fax: +49 221 951688
web: www.dom.de
mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Markus Schulte wrote:
MS is there a way to hatadd a spare to a running raid5?
After you get the box to recognize the disk, I'm fairly certain you just
do a raidhotadd. It'll auto-add as a spare.
--
Randomly Generated Tagline:
"These periods are always 15 minutes shorter
In a message dated 99-11-29 06:03:16 EST, you write:
The report was:
scsi0: MEDIUM ERROR on channel 0, id 5, lun 0, CDB:
Read (10) 00 00 7d a6 c0 00 00 80 00
Current error sd08:50: sense key Medium Error
Additional sense indicates Unrecovered read error
scsidisk I/O
Piete Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Exec summary: will raid1 code cause read error sectors to be
re-vectored ? Full gory details: I am having problems with some new
disks, in that sectors are going bad. I kind of didn't expect this
on `new' disks, but maybe I'm just not used to having
Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected! Assume -R? [n] Y
Do *NOT* say Y here ! If you say Y, the stuff that the patch should add will
be REMOVED and the stuff a patch should remove will be added again (reverse
patch = make a patch undone).
Thomas
--
Thomas Waldmann ("Computer nach
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 02:58:42AM -0500, Remo Strotkamp wrote:
Hi there,
first of all thanx for all the replies concerning my previous mail.
second: hi jakob and here are the single mode bonnie results...
Thanks :)
I have done some basic benchmarking in single user mode, and got
Hi Piete,
I cannot see "03/11" anywhere -- did you reverse map "MEDIUM ERROR" ?
Yes, long years of painful experience. 03/11 is reported by the drive when
read retries are exhausted and a sector is not readable.
SO: Read (10) 00 00 7d a6 c0 00 00 80 00
... + ?1 ?2 ?3 ++ ++
On Mon, 29 Nov 1999, Jakob Østergaard wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 1999 at 02:58:42AM -0500, Remo Strotkamp wrote:
Hi there,
first of all thanx for all the replies concerning my previous mail.
second: hi jakob and here are the single mode bonnie results...
expect the raid1 beeing lots
All,
The current setup that I have is a 2.2.11 kernel with the 19990824
raidtools and patches. I have setup 2 linear md's and then a mirror of
those two as follows:
[ /etc/raidtab ]
raiddev /dev/md0
raid-level linear
nr-raid-disks 2
chunk-size 8
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 1999 13:23:34 +0100
From: vanliesh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have the following configuration:
Mainboard : Supermicro P6SBA
Memory : 128MB SDRAM
SCSI-controller : Symbios 875
RAID-controller : Mylex eXtreme RAID DAC1164P
Harddisk: 3 * Seagate
No, I just do a reboot of the system.
What I do is take out a harddisk, wait for about 1 minute and see if the
deamon detects that there is a harddrive missing. When it does, I insert
another disk and wait for another minute till it is powered up. Then I
issue the rebuild command.
Maarten
Ummm... I hate to sound like a broken record, but try the latest stable
kernel version. 2.2.11 had file system issues that were exacerbated by
RAID situations. Get the latest stable -ac and you shouldn't have to
patch...
-Original Message-
From: Brian C. Huffman [mailto:[EMAIL
tiotest is a nice start to what I would like to see: a replacement
for bonnie... While stripping out the character-based stuff from
bonnie would bring it closer to what I'd like to see, threading
would be a bit of a pain so starting with tiotest as a base might
not be a bad idea if people are
hi.
sorry if this is a stupid question, but where can i find that "bonnie"
benchmarking program? i couldn't find any mention of it in the raidtools
docs/howtos/etc, nor anywhere else i looked really.
thanks for any info.
-tcl.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
sorry if this is a stupid question, but where can i find that "bonnie"
benchmarking program? i couldn't find any mention of it in the
raidtools docs/howtos/etc, nor anywhere else i looked really.
http://www.textuality.com/bonnie/download.html
-dpn
A search on www.freshmeat.net or www.linuxapps.com should turn it up,
but it doesn't. The build I use is available from the builder's WWW
page at:
http://people.redhat.com/dledford/benchmark.html
It's all RPM format, but if you need DEB or TGZ packages, I'm sure
they're out there too. Hope
I ran in to a similar problem. It turned out to be an overheating
problem. When I added another 6 fans to the cabnet, the problem went
away. It could also be a problem with the new RAID Driver as I am running
an older version.
My configuration:
Mainboard : Supermicro P6DBE
I find varying the block size *very* interesting :)
James
--
Miscellaneous Engineer --- IBM Netfinity Performance Development
--- tiobench.sh.origMon Nov 29 17:53:16 1999
+++ tiobench.sh Mon Nov 29 18:04:14 1999
@@ -8,13 +8,14 @@
exit 1;
fi
-if [ $# != 2 ] ; then
-echo
perhaps ASUS?
Jon R. Doyle
Systems Administrator
Document Solutions, Inc.
1611 Telegraph Avenue Ste. 1010
Oakland, Ca. 94612
510-986-0250
"Theron J. Lewis" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/29/99 02:02PM
I ran in to a similar problem. It turned out to be an overheating
problem. When I added another 6
I configured sda3 and sdb3 to a raid 1(mirror) with no problem.
Now I want to change the configuration to raid0,
so I edit the /etc/raidtab file,
issue mkraid --force /dev/md0,
everything seems fine, but when "raidstart" and check the status,
the raid is still running in old raid1.
This may be a silly question, but if a multi-disk device is just a
bunch-o-disks working together to create one virtual disk, then is
there any reason why a single multi-disk device couldnt house multiple
partitions e.g. via msdos extended partition
Obviously there would have to be software to
I managed to get a nice 14GB array up using RedHat 6.0 and piecing together
information from man pages and web sitesbut now I am wondering what the
preferred documentation set is for the latest RAID tools. The stuff in the
LDP is pretty old looking.
I would like to find out information
Hi,
Sorry for the stupid newby question but here goes.
I have downloaded the kernel 2.2.13 and it has raid stuff in it and it is working fine.
In ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/raid/alpha/ there are kernel patches. How do
these patches differ from the raid code that is already in the
hi ya bryan
http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO
and my collection...
http://www.Linux-Consulting.com/Raid
chunksize...etc
http://www.Linux-Consulting.com/Raid/Docs/raid_chunksize.txt
chunk size and stripping comparson
29 matches
Mail list logo
