Krzysztof SIEROTA wrote:
>
> >
> As far as I know the issue has been fixed in 2.4.* kernel series.
> ReiserFS and software RAID5 is NOT safe in 2.2.*
>
> Chris
Hi,
but Stephen Tweedie (some time ago) pointed out that ,
the only way to make a software raid system that survives (without data corr
There is a possibility that the slave can die if the master goes down.
Therefore the purpose of RAID1 availability goes away in this situation.
What's still left is RAID1 data protection, that means even if your box
stops
or do not boot anymore your data should still be ok, since only one of
t
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Mika Kuoppala wrote:
>
> [snip]
> >
> > I think Jakob Østergaard has made raid-reconf utility
> > which you can use to grow raid0 arrays. But i think
> > i didn't support converting from raid0 to raid5. Or
> > perhaps it alraeady does =? :)
>
> It do
Hi,
I went to the 3WARE site.
really nice the 8 IDE channel version and cheap too.
:-)
I guess they do not support master/slave configurations for performance
and reliability reasons.
(At least I am assuming this because they say up to 8 drives and there are
8 connectors)
I noticed that they do
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
> > In the power+disk failure case, there is a very narrow window in which
> > parity may be incorrect, so loss of the disk may result in inability to
> > correctly restore the lost data.
>
> For some people, this very narrow window may still be a problem.
> Especially when
Thomas Davis wrote:
> JMy 4way IDE based, 2 channels (ie, master/slave, master/slave) built
> using IBM 16gb Ultra33 drives in RAID0 are capable of about 25mb/sec
> across the raid.
nice to hear :-) not a very big performance degradation
>
>
> Adding a Promise 66 card, changing to all masters,
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
> Ideally, what I'd like to see the reconstruction code do is to:
>
> * lock a stripe
> * read a new copy of that stripe locally
> * recalc parity and write back whatever disks are necessary for the stripe
> * unlock the stripe
>
> so that the data never goes through t
James Manning wrote:
> [ Tuesday, January 11, 2000 ] Benno Senoner wrote:
> > The problem is that power outages are unpredictable even in presence
> > of UPSes therefore it is important to have some protection against
> > power losses.
>
> I gotta ask dying power
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 07 Jan 2000 13:26:21 +0100, Benno Senoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > what happens when I run RAID5+ jornaled FS and the box is just writing
> > data to the disk and then a power outage occurs ?
>
&
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
(...)
>
> 3) The soft-raid backround rebuild code reads and writes through the
>buffer cache with no synchronisation at all with other fs activity.
>After a crash, this background rebuild code will kill the
>write-ordering attempts of any journalling files
Jan Edler wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 10, 2000 at 12:49:29PM -0800, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Jan 2000, Jan Edler wrote:
> > > - Performance is really horrible if you use IDE slaves.
> > >Even though you say you aren't performance-sensitive, I'd
> > >recommend against it if possible.
> >
Hi,
I was just thinking about the following :
There will soon be available at least one stable journaled FS for linux
out of the box.
Of course we want to run our soft-RAID5 array with journaling in order
to
prevent large fsck and speed up the boot process.
My question:
what happens when I run
Luca Berra wrote:
>
>
> According to Stephen Tweedie the problem happens in both case,
> writes to the swap file do bypass the buffer cache in ANY case.
>
> only way to be safe is:
> do not use spare drives
> swapoff before raidhotadding
> replace swapon with something like
> while grep -q "^${1#
John Barbee wrote:
> I'm running Redhat 6 which comes with the 2.2.5 kernel.
>
> Does that mean I should be using the raid0145-2.2.6 patch from ftp.kernel.org?
>
> How do I incorporate this patch into the kernel. I couldn't find any
> directions. The patch starts with a lot of +'s and -'s. I p
Can someone of you explain us please,
if a failure of a the master or slave drive, causes both drives on the
same IDE channel to be inaccessible ?
I tested this with my Pentium board (Tyan Tomcat HX chipset),
and had no problems while disconnecting
either a master or a slave drive.
Does this happ
Luca Berra wrote:
>
>
> > Third, (naive questions) if raid1 supports on-the-fly disk
> > "reconstruction" why can't I simply add another identical disk alongside
> > my present one, activate raid1 non-destructively and have disk2 be
> > "reconstructed" as the mirror image of disk1?
> because linu
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Sun, 9 May 1999, Giulio Botto wrote:
>
> > > I downloaded the latest version of the raidutils and compiled them but
> > > still the same error, is there something else I should have goten?
> >
> > My guess is the "latest" raidtools are already installed, the problem lies
>
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I don't see the relevance to linux-raid either, but the 2.2.x kernel does
> have /proc/sys/vm/overcommit_memory which will enable the below behaviour.
> It's off by default though...
thanks, I will try this /proc setting,
I am using a standard RH5.2 box with a 2.2.6 ke
David Guo wrote:
> Hi.
> If you read the document of the raid. You'll know swap on raid is not safe.
> And you don't have any reason to use swap on raid. Because kernel handles
> the swap on different disk will not be worse then raid.
> I think you can checkout the docs with raid.
>
> Yours David
Alvin Starr wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Apr 1999, Benno Senoner wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > My system is a Redhat 5.2 running on
> > linux 2.2.6 + raid0145-19990421.
> >
> > I tested if the system is stable while swapping heavily.
> > I tested a regul
Hi,
My system is a Redhat 5.2 running on
linux 2.2.6 + raid0145-19990421.
I tested if the system is stable while swapping heavily.
I tested a regular swap area and a soft-RAID1 (2 disks) swaparea.
So I wrote e little program wich does basically the following:
allocate as much as possible bloc
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Benno Senoner wrote:
>
> > > no need to do this in the kernel (or even in raidtools). I use such
> > > scripts to 'mass-create' partitioned disks:
> >
> > but it's not unsafe to overwrite the partition-t
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Apr 1999, Benno Senoner wrote:
>
> > I am interested more in the idea of automatically repartition a new blank disk
> > while it is hot-added.
>
> no need to do this in the kernel (or even in raidtools). I use such
> scripts to
>
> This brings up another question, partitioning. The above (I don't think)
> would work currently
> anyway due to the disks having to be partitioned out first (correct?). How
> hard would it be
> to have the raid code itself write the required partition information and
> whatever it requires
>
Helge Hafting wrote:
> [question on how to hot-swap IDE]
>
> I have an IDE drive that I can disconnect and reconnect with no
> problems. It is not on a RAID though.
> The controller is nothing special, a ultra-dma thing
> built into the shuttle motherboard.
>
> The trick seems to be unloading th
Stephen C. Tweedie wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 14 Apr 1999 21:59:49 +0100 (BST), A James Lewis
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > It wasn't a month ago that this was not possible because it needed
to
> > allocate memory for the raid and couldn't because it needed to swap
to
> > do it? Was I imagini
Hi,
do you know if there are already the raid alpha patches available
for kernel 2.2.4 ?
at www.us.kernel.org/ the latest I found is for 2.2.3.
or can I apply the raid-2.2.3 patch over a 2.2.4 kernel ?
thank you for the info.
regards,
Benno.
>
Yes,
the same problem happens in the swap-over-NFS case: the nfs client
needs to allocate some memory (which is not disponible) , the the system
tries to
swap out pages via NFS, leading to an infinite recursion ...
I am not a kernel hacker, but I agree wich Luca thatthe RAID code
should inc
Hi,
I tested setting up a swapfile on an md device: ( 2.0.36+0145raid)
I created an 8MB swapfile on the md device,
dd if=/dev/zero of=/swapfile bs=1024 count=8192
mkswap /swapfile 8192
swapon /swapfile
at this point the swapon process hangs and says:
"Got md request, not good ..."
even tryi
Hi,
I heard that actually soft-raid for Linux can't swap over a /dev/md*
device.
Someone suggests that putting enough RAM into a box, can avoid swapping,
but I think it is safe to have some swap space, in the case a process
eats up much
memory for short time, to prevent that pages of executable
>
>
> You all miss the obvious point here, IMHO. The point of a journalled fs is
> not that you save some time for fsck. Actually, even with a journalled
> fs, I'd suggest doing an fsck from time to time just to be sure everything
> is
> fine.
>
Yes I fully agree that you should run fsck from tim
"Stephen C. Tweedie" wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, 11 Feb 1999 09:00:20 +0100, Benno Senoner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> said:
>
> > can someone please explain what journaling precisely does, (is this
> > a sort of mechanism, which leaves the filesystem in a
>
Hello,
>
>
> I had journaling and buffer commit code, but not any filesystem
> personality stuff. Current status is that 2.2 is out (yay!) and
> journaling is once again my top priority, and I've just started doing
> real testing of basic filesystem transactions (currently only for the
> simp
Hi,
does anyone of you know how long it takes,
to e2fsck (after an unclean shutdown) for example a soft-raid5 array of
a total size of about 40-50 GB
( example : 6 disk with 9GB (UW SCSI) )
assume the machine is a PII300 - PII400
assume that the raid-array is almost filled with data (so that e2f
>
> >In this case the bootfloppy has the advantage that if it is corrupt you can
> >quickly replace it with a new.
>
> This is why you'd have entries for all the disks in the lilo config files.
> You'd use lablel like Linux_d1, Linux_d2 ... or whatever. If loading the
> image from the first disk f
Martin Bene wrote:
> At 16:17 29.01.99 +0100, you wrote:
> >
> >assume I set up LILO to load the kernel off the first disk (where the
> >/boot dir resides too)
> >
> >when the first disk crashes , the system won't boot anymore.
> >Solution:
>
> have a /boot1 ... /bootn on each of your disks; make
Hello,
I was looking for the most crashproof setup of a Software Root-RAID
array:
my conclusion:
assume one wants to setup a machine with Root RAID5 array,
the problem is the booting of the kernel,
since LILO uses the BIOS routines the kernel must reside on a standard
partition (non software-r
m. allan noah wrote:
> the eide electrical interface does not support hot-swap. i have done
> hot-remove many times, but not hot-add. seems like a nice way to lose a
> drive.
I tested the following:
Redhat 5.2 kernel 2.0.36 + raid 0145 + raidtools 0.90
RAID5 setup consisting of 3 partitions: /
Hello to all,
I have a few questions about the status of
the Software RAID on Linux.
I am interested in the hot-swap , hot-add/remove
features of the current alpha Sotfware RAID for Linux.
1) I downloaded the alpha version of the 0.90 raidtools
and there are programs like raidhotadd and raidhot
39 matches
Mail list logo
