On Sun, 30 Jul 2000, bert hubert wrote:
> Did you compile both systems with 'use dma by default'? Try using hdparm on
> 2.4.0 to force it to use dma.
>
Yes, I checked dma is enabled.
Holger
Hello
I gave 2.4.0-test5 a try but am very disapointed with the results:
---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU
Hello
Since everyone is talking about disk benchmark and the results on
different kernel version I would like to ask a question about this.
I noticed when using bonnie that I could sometimes get very different
results (> 20%) using the same kernel and disks only that the second
test (slower one)
On Mon, 17 Jul 2000, Marc Haber wrote:
> |mkraid: aborted, see the syslog and /proc/mdstat for potential clues.
> |haber@gwen[9/60]:~$ cat /proc/mdstat
> |Personalities :
> |read_ahead not set
> |unused devices:
> |haber@gwen[10/61]:~$
>
You have not compiled in any raid personnalities into y
On Wed, 31 May 2000, Philippe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am looking for high disponibility in a Linux system and was used to use
> a RAID-1 system based on a hardware controller. I am currently working on
> the possibility of using software raid instead, but I am quite in newbie
> with it...
> Coul
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Jason Lin wrote:
> If you put / and /boot on raid then probably your swap
> is also on raid.
>
No, unless you configured it this way. But be careful with swap on
raid. It is currently not save to swap on raid while an array is being
reconstructed eg. after a crash. I am us
On Sun, 28 May 2000, David Francis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have just set up a new web server with two drives each configured with
> four identical partitions. The three "non-swap" partitions are all set up
> as RAID level 1 mirrors. Everything is up and running fine.
>
> md0 = /
> md1 = /home
On Fri, 26 May 2000, Edward Schernau wrote:
> I wouldn't say that ECC-RAM is a must for RAID systems - if
> you need it, you need it.
>
Ok, its not required, but if you do care about your data I would
strongly recommend it for SW raid.
Holger
On Fri, 26 May 2000, Darren Evans wrote:
>
> Having spent a considerable amount of time trying to
> ascertain the stability of vinum under FreeBSD, i'm not
> confident in using it on a production box.
>
> I don't know much (at the moment about Linux Software RAID),
> but would like to hear p
On Thu, 25 May 2000, Christoph Terhechte wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just bought Red Hat 6.2 to set up an intranet database server. One
> of the reasons for my choice was their claim for improved RAID
> management. Browsing trough this list, however, I keep reading about
> RAID patches that should be a
On Tue, 9 May 2000, Dirk Slaghekke wrote:
>
>
>
> I am running a 2.2.11 kernel with the alpha-raid-patches in order to get
> a raid-root to work.
> Unfortunately the system crashes no and then with a "out of memory" for
> all processes.
>
> The "Changes.log" from the 2.2.15 seems to address
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Corin Hartland-Swann wrote:
>
> Holger,
>
> On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Holger Kiehl wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Corin Hartland-Swann wrote:
> > > I was hoping that RAID-1 would 'stripe' reads between the disks,
> > > inc
On Thu, 27 Apr 2000, Corin Hartland-Swann wrote:
> I was hoping that RAID-1 would 'stripe' reads between the disks,
> increasing read performance to RAID-0 levels, but leaving write
> performance at single-disk levels. Does anyone know why it doesn't do
> this?
>
I think there is a patch for t
On Tue, 18 Apr 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I've also noticed a few other postings about problems/hangups with 2940/AIC79xx
> on Linux RAID, so it seems we're not alone with this problem.
>
> Does anyone have any kind of information as to the status of this. Is the
> bug(s) identified?
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Danilo Godec wrote:
> If I have a three disk RAID5 array and one disk seems to be slowly
> failing. The disks are on hot-swapable backplane.
>
> I know that 'echo "scsi remove-single-device X X X X" > /proc/scsi/scsi'
> works for me and I can remove and replace the disk,
On Sat, 11 Mar 2000, Byron Albert wrote:
> What raid version is currently in the 2.3.51+ versions of the kernel. I
>
0.90, but only linear and raid 0, as far as I know.
Holger
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Christian Robottom Reis wrote:
>
> We're working on a patch that might make it's way into the next Slack
> release. In the meantime, I can suggest you do it completely differently:
>
> a) Make RAID bootdisk.
> b) boot up and mkraid
>
To do the mkraid you need a raidtab fil
On Wed, 8 Mar 2000, Brian Pomerantz wrote:
>
> I also use write-back, which increased the performance a bit. The
> current equipment I have is going back to Compaq in a few days but I
> already have more loaners in (they need to be installed). I'll have 4
> Mylex DAC1164P controllers and 40
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, James Manning wrote:
> [ Monday, March 6, 2000 ] Holger Kiehl wrote:
> > node2: 2 x PII-350 128MB with 5 disks used as one single
> > SW-Raid5, kernel 2.2.14 + mingos patch
>
> could you try 2 things?
> 1) UP kerne
On Mon, 6 Mar 2000, Slip wrote:
>
> 1-Install slack as normal, utilizing /home and /var partitions(I'm using
> these partitions because I have very little 'play' in free space in my
> root dir)
> 2-install patches, recompile kernel
> 3-tar the entire /var and /home to a backup file
> 4-instal
Hello,
I tried to do the following:
Computer 1 (node1) | Computer 2 (node2)
-+
dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/nbd (100MB) | dd if=/dev/zero of=/home/nbd (100MB)
nbd-server 1024 /home/nbd| nbd-server 1
On Thu, 3 Feb 2000, Thomas Waldmann wrote:
> Hi Glenn,
>
> > > is performance. We have yet to get s/w RAID to perform any faster than
> > > 25MB/s (according to Bonnie) in any configuration or RAID level.
>
> > 25MB/s ?
> > Ive personally gotten 37MB/s with 3 quantum ide drives in raid0 mode,
On Wed, 2 Feb 2000, Edward Schernau wrote:
> Is raid 0.90 in the 2.3 kernels, or do you still need to patch?
>
No its not in 2.3 kernels, but I have not yet looked at 2.3.41 and 42.
Ingo has released a patch for 2.3.40-pre? at:
http://www.redhat.com/~mingo/ibc-ext2-raid-2.3.40-N1
It looks
Hello
Since swapping on a software raid is not save during the resync phase of
the swap drives, I thought of running the following script instead of
swapon -a (md3 is my swap drive):
#!/bin/sh
#
while /bin/grep md3 /proc/mdstat | /bin/grep -q "resync="
do
echo "md3 resyncing"
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000, Jakob Østergaard wrote:
>
> To everyone on linux-raid:
> It seems improbable that the 0.90 raid stuff will go into 2.4 currently. This
> is catastrophic. We need to try Ingo's patch, and give it all the testing we
> can. If enough people try the patch and we can give a
On Fri, 14 Jan 2000, James Manning wrote:
> [ Friday, January 14, 2000 ] jesse nelson wrote:
> > I had the same problem the default kernel is not patched on 6.0 or 6.1
> > installs although they include the 0.90 tools. I think the up2date RPM's are
> > though. I just moved to Mandrake 7.Beta an
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> here is the first alpha version of the '2.4 RAID merge' patch against
> pre4-2.3.40:
>
> http://www.redhat.com/~mingo/ibc-ext2-raid-2.3.40-N1
>
Doesn't work for me. When booting system locks up with the following output:
ll_rw_block: Tryi
Here are some results I got with bonnie:
---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
MachineMB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
1 768 3
Hello
How does one set the chunk-size with RH6.1, when installing? On my box
it always sets it to 64 for my raid 5, but I want it to be 32. Is there
any way to change this?
I assume, that it is not possible to change this on an active raid system?
Holger
On 18 Dec 1998, Carlos Carvalho wrote:
> Trying this list first, if it's not raid-related I'll go to linux-kernel...
>
> Our raid5 server locked again, with the message "kernel panic hm ??"
> displayed 3 times on the console. This is the second time.
> Interestingly, it locked roughly at the s
30 matches
Mail list logo
