On Wed, 10 May 2000, Dave Meythaler wrote:
> I was doing some testing earlier this week on RedHat 6.2 (2.2.14-5
> recompiled w/o raid modules) using /boot RAID-1 (two disks, hda and hdc) and
> saw what sounds like the same problem discussed here.
>
> With hda unplugged, I would get 0x80 errors
ray was reversed, lilo complained with the boot-time
message "Error 0x80" and required me to enter a valid kernel label to
boot. This confirms that lilo is not properly updating the second
disk in the array.
- C
--
Chance Reschke
UW Astronomy
xists - no backup copy made.
Map file size: 10240 bytes.
Writing boot sector.
Any help fixing this would be great.
Thanks,
Chance
--
Chance Reschke
UW Astronomy
> I have a fileserver with two, 8-disk RAID-5 volumes, both of which
> appear to be corrupted. Linux kernel 2.2.12, raid0145-19990824-2.2.11
> patch, raidtools-0.90. I could use some help reviving my filesystems,
> if that's possible.
[ ... ]
My disks are back on-line. It turns out that I had
t;mke2fs -b
4096 -R stride=8", so I assume I should use these options along with
"-S" if I go that route?
Anyway, I'll be very grateful for anything anyone can do to help.
Thanks,
Chance
--
Chance Reschke
Astronomy Department
University of Washington
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
mode, and the array came up OK. As it resynced itself
(necessary because of the ungraceful shutdown - even the array without
hardware failure had to resync), I fscked the filesystem clean without any
trouble.
- C
--
Chance Reschke
University of Washington Astronomy
>---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
> 500 3742 46.8 4623 6.7 2604 7.9 6614 72.9 13314 14.6 183.
On Tue, 19 Jan 1999, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> | Hmm. I use SCSI on high-performance systems, but if IDE is so bad, why
> | does NASA use IDE? ;)
>
> as far as I know, beowulf tends to use the network more than the disk, so it
> isn't necessary to have an extremely fast disk subsystem. RAM, CP
Hi,
I'm having trouble setting up a RAID0 array using the
raid0145-19981215-2.0.36 kernel patch and the raidtools-19981214-0.90
tools.
I patched up and rebuilt the kernel, ran lilo and reboted. I created an
/etc/raidtab based on the example, and rebooted again. The kernel reports
the followi
Hi,
Has anyone run bonnie against RAID-0/5 arrays running on either the AMI
438 Ultra-2/LVD with good LVD disks (e.g. Quantum Atlas III or even
Seagate Cheetah)? With any other LVD RAID controller? If so, I'd like to
see your results.
Thanks,
Chance
Hi,
I am attempting to use the Dell OEM version of the AMI Megaraid 428 SCSI
RAID controller. I'm using RedHat Linux 5.2 for Intel along with the 0.92
version of the megaraid driver which is distributed with RedHat's 2.0.36
kernel. So far, I have been unable to get the kernel to recognize the
c
12 matches
Mail list logo
