[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Is there some good documentation about raid and ide? I am using the
> raid0145-19990824-2.2.11 patch at the moment and although they work
> fine am wondering if performance is enhanced with the ide patches
> since all my drives are ide (I know don't you think i WANT S
Jeremy Hansen wrote:
> [discussions of OOPS with raid on raid deleted]
>
> I *really* need suggestions here. This is a system which is supposed to
> go production on Monday and I'm not feeling too good about this.
We discussed this last week, no? The bug has been reported and duplicated,
ana ap
Michael Cunningham wrote:
> Unfortunatly on reads on a raid 1 array i am seeing about what it would
> be for a single drive:( definatly not even close to 2x.
I was wrong. I just went back and looked at my tests, and I was recalling
raid 0 tests. My raid 1 tests show this as well, no benefit fro
Michael Cunningham wrote:
> Timing buffered disk reads: 32 MB in 1.87 seconds =17.11 MB/sec
>
> I can understand the write performance but I would think the read
> performance would be better given that it should be reading from both
> halves of the mirror?
What is your chunk size set at in th
Mark Spencer wrote:
> > as "failed-disk" as opposed to "raid-disk" in your
> > /etc/raidtab file. The device you give it is not even
> > actually accessed or written to; you could put /foo/bar
> > and it will still build degraded without and error, if I'm
> > not mistaken.
>
> mkraid says "unrec
> Linux-RAID mailing list archive: http://www.linuxhq.com/lnxlists/.
> This link has no archive for this list. Is there a searchable archive
> somewhere that I can look through before I ask unnecessary questions?
http://www.kernelnotes.org/lnxlists/
tom
Marc Huber:
> These tools don't seem to be included with the raidtools snapshots.
> Where do I get them from?
when you do a make install. make creates symlinks named these pointing back
to the main program that handles these functions. you can do it by hand as
well.
tom
Thomas Bange wrote:
> I am looking for a kernel patch for the 2.3.x series of raid0145, but I
> haven' t found one. The lastest patch I found is against 2.2.11. Are there
> any new version of the 'new' raid drivers for recent development kernels ?
Not yet, no.
tom
> where is a good 'reliable' archive of this list stored?
http://www.kernelnotes.org/lnxlists/linux-raid/
Thomas Waldmann wrote:
> I think latest Linux SW-RAID is working pretty good (ever
> wondered why it is in the alpha directory ;-) and pretty
> fast. Great stuff.
Alpha is a mis-nomer.
> I remember stuff in "stable" kernels that was MUCH less tested
> and MUCH worse (e.g. SMP hangs, buffer probl
I said:
> At this point, the feature freeze for 2.3.x kicked in as well.
> Alan Cox suggested porting up to 2.3.x (there are some substantial
> differences), but that 2.4 (based on the existing 2.3 feature
> freeze) would still not include raid 0.90... that would have to
> wait for 2.5/2.6... at
Mika Kuoppala wrote:
> Is raid5 safe bet for swapping ? I recall reading
> that atleast in the past swapping wasnt possible on arrays.
Official word says yes.
tom
Randy Winch wrote:
> I had a raid fail do to an external cable falling off the box last night
> (came loose andyway) :-/ I have 2 drives that got marked as failed...It
> there anyway to mark them good so I can try to save some of the data ??
http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/Softwa
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> I started hacking together a utility to allow resizing and eventually
> reconfiguration of RAID sets.
Kick ass. I had been thinking of doing the same thing, as I could have used
such a thing in the past. I gave it a shot on a mini-test raid0 setup i
made for it, and it
David Teigland wrote:
> Has anyone else tried raw-io with md devices? It works for me but the
> performance is quite bad.
This is a recently reported issue on the linux-kernel mailing list. The
jist of it is that rawio is using a 512 byte blocksize, where raid assumes a
1024. This was only firs
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> Shouldn't the raidhotadd command check that the supplied disk
> name to be added is actually a valid device in the raidtab file ?
I'm not so sure...
I never saw raidhotadd as being an application that required the drive to
already be known. In fact, I always presumed i
Florian Lohoff:
> > Can you duplicate this using only one of the raid5 sets? I
> tried to cause
>
> A stripe of ONE raid5 doesnt make sense ...
If you say so.
What I meant of course, is can you duplicate the same behavior using ONLY
ONE /dev/mdX "disk" That is, only initialize /dev/md0, mke2fs
> I found it again.
>
> http://www.arcoide.com/
>
You should watch out for the details. I notice that their solution only
does write mirroring and fail-over, no read balancing. One review they link
to also mentions that the reviewer couldn't run the disks in DMA mode after
installing... and th
> I am running 2.2.12. What I don't understand is if both md0 and md1 are
> kicked out, why am I still able to use md2. I can read information
> without any problems at this point. That seems strange.
Are you sure it's not just information in the disk cache? the disk cache
can grow to be man
Florian Lohoff wrote:
> I did a bit further - Hung the machine - Couldnt log in (All Terms
> hang immediatly) - Tried to reboot and when it hung at
> "Unmounting file..."
> i got a term SysRq- Tand saw many processes stuck in the D state.
>
> Seems something produces a deadlock (ll_rw_blk ?) and
Jeremy wrote:
> Ok, so I know there's a bad drive in my array, but which one caused the
> errors so I can begin to replace it? Also, how do I recover without
> loosing information?
>
> Here is the info:
>
> /proc/mdstat:
> Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid5] [translucent]
> read_ahea
Florian Lohoff wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 14, 1999 at 05:46:36PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> > Hi,
> > i am discovering reproduceable crashes with stripes of raid5s
> >
> > Kernel 2.2.12 + raid0145-19990824-2.2.11.gz
> > raidtools 19990924
> >
> > Message is "Got md request" and machine freezes hard
Leonhard Zachl wrote:
> but how could i tell the md driver on the primary server that the local
> disk is faulty and the 'nbd-disk' from the second server is ok
have you tried this? I haven't done anything with nbd, but I would expect
the following to happen:
* primary server comes up again
*
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > I can think of these possible reasons for the SMP problems:
> >
> > (A) SMP race(s) in IDE driver in original 2.2.13pre15
> > (B) SMP-deadlock in raid-2.2.11-patch
>
> (B) is quite unlikely if you do not have it applied and the box still
> crashes?
I said:
> * raid5_make_request: added a block to test for failed_disks > 1, clear
> needed flags in buffer_head and return early
> * raid5_error: a simple failed_disks > 1 check to keep the "md:
> bug in file raid5.c, line 659" from appearing
> [...]
> You can get the patch at
> http://volition.or
Robert wrote:
> Situation: My motherboad is a BE6 from Soft Switch. It features 4 IDE
> connectors. IDE 1 & 2 were detected at install time and are running
> with a CDrom drive and 3 HDs. IDE 3 & 4 use the Ultra ATA/66 IDE chip
> set. I have been unable to get IDE3 or 4 to work.
You need the
Hello...
I've been working with the RAID code on two disk failures. You may have
noticed my earlier patch that cleans things up a bit when this happens... at
least now you can umount the disk and reboot.
A couple of issues are in my head about how raid5 handles this, and I
thought I'd solicit s
Hello,
I've been having difficulty recently with my ide raid5 array. While it has
nothing to do with raid, any number of udma33 CRC errors will result in the
ide bus being reset.. often resulting in a situation where neither drive on
the bus can be read. While I've been working with this proble
Marc Merlin wrote:
> moremagic:~# mkraid --version
> mkraid version 0.90.0
> [...]
> moremagic:~# mkraid --really-force /dev/md0
> unrecognized option failed-disk
> detected error on line 11:
> failed-disk 2
> mkraid: aborted
the failed-disk directive is relatively new
I said:
> * Changed parser.c to assume a chunk-size of 4k for a raid0 array that
> otherwise has no chunk-size... as the documentation suggests to folks that
> no chunk-size param is needed for raid0... and since you can change raid0
> chunk-size after the raid has been made, they aren't stuck wi
As many on this list have mentioned, there are a couple of problems that
keep people posting for help with. I've made some quick patches to the
raidtools-19990824-0.90 package in hopes of helping people out in the
future. these patches are all superficial, in that they shouldn't affect
how raid
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
> IIRC the 12 disk limit is a ``feature''. Actually you can have up
> to 15 disks. Simply grep for the 12 disk constant in the raidtools
> and flip it up to 15. You can't go further than that though.
> [...]
> Note !! This is purely out of memory, and if I was you I'd
> s
James Manning wrote:
> [ Thursday, September 30, 1999 ] David Cooley wrote:
> > Can you edit raidtab and change the chunk size without
> corrupting existing
> > data?
>
> Not that I know of... that'd be nice, but pretty unrealistic considering
> how the data gets laid out on disk... I just thank G
Chuck Lever wrote:
> if your stripe unit is small, then the disks will end up doing a bunch of
> small reads. if the stripe size is large, then the "small reads" are
> automatically coalesced into a large read. and if the read is aligned
> with the track cache, it is more likely that the disk'
Bruno Prior wrote:
> > device /dev/sda6
> > raid-disk 1
> > failed-disk 1
>
> A lot of people trying to use the failed-disk method, are using
> these last two lines in their raidtab. I thought the
> failed-disk line was instead of
> Of course, I have a half dozen files that I would like to recover from the
> crashed raid set. Before I switched to the kernel based method of raid
> recognition, I seem to recall a ckraid --force-sync option, or some such,
> that allowed me to convince the raid set that it was a valid raid set.
> For what it's worth, this particular box is NOT running any IDE
> drives. It has (4) 2.1gb SCSI drives on an aic78xx adapter.
>
> The machine itself is an old HP Netserver LXe Pro with (2)
> processors (only one running now, obviously) and 192MB of RAM.
>
> I can't switch to 2.2.13pre11-non-RA
Jason A. Diegmueller wrote:
> The main goal here was to get the system stable. I feel it is. But
> if anyone has any ideas as to why SMP would cause the hardlockups,
> or if there is anything I can try to help out the community and track
> down what would cause this problem, be sure to let me kn
Jason A Diegmueller wrote:
> NOTE: I can't go newer then 2.2.11 at this time due to the fact
>the latest released raid0145 patch is for 2.2.11. RAID
>people, I haven't tried it yet: Will it patch 2.2.12 without
>too much hassle?
Yep, the 2.2.11 raid patches work fine for 2.2.12.
Rogier Wolff wrote:
> If you're seeing THIS kind of errors, it SURE looks like a hardware
> issue. If the software is making errors, I'd expect a random byte
> inserted somewhere. A block of data shifted one byte. A whole block
> corrupted (delivered to the wrong address in memory). Things like
>
Andre Hedrick wrote:
> AGP Card Slot
> PCI 1 PDC20246: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 78 hdm/n/o/p
> PCI 2 PDC20246: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 68 hdi/j/k/l
> PCI 3 PDC20246: IDE controller on PCI bus 00 dev 58 hde/f/g/h
> PCI 4
> PCI 5
>
> Update "2.2.12.uniform-ide-6.20.hydra.patch.gz" t
Hello folks,
Due to too much coffee while diagnosing another problem... I found myself
unable to sleep. So I did some ide raid0 benchmarks for everyone to mull
over.
[Note that I did these benchmarks with hdparm and not bonnie, as I actually
had a readable raid5 filesystem on this disk set. B
I wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > just a suggestion - if it's a faulty cable or a single faulty disk, then
> > you can find the problematic disk (or group of disks) by using
> less than 9
> > disks in the RAID0 array. I'd first split it into a 4 and 5-disk group.
> > This presumes the test doesn't
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> just a suggestion - if it's a faulty cable or a single faulty disk, then
> you can find the problematic disk (or group of disks) by using less than 9
> disks in the RAID0 array. I'd first split it into a 4 and 5-disk group.
> This presumes the test doesnt take too long.
Thank
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> just to make sure wether this is a RAID5 problem, could you test a RAID0
> setup with the same number and physical layout of disks? That way you can
> simulate similar IO load, without the complexity of RAID5. RAID0 is simple
> and long-tested enough to be trusted 100%.
Certa
Hello all,
I am encountering reproducible read time errors while reading from my
existing RAID array with at least one disk running on a HPT-366 driven
channel. This manifests itself as random errors... e.g. if you read the
same thing five times, you will get five different answers. I first
enc
Ingo wrote:
> I will make the
> double-disk failure more graceful, it makes no sense to play hardball at
> that time anymore. We might be strict wrt. failures happening on a
> redundant array, but if it's in degraded mode we should either shut the
> array down immediately (as suggested before), or
Lawrence Dickson wrote:
>I guess this has been asked before, but - when will the RAID
> code get past the 12 disk limit? We'd even be willing to use
> a variant - our customer wants 18 disk RAID-5 real bad.
A solution you may already be aware of is to use two 9 disk RAID5 sets, and
then use t
There has been some discussion (and joy) on this list as the 0.90 RAID code
made it's way into the 2.2.11 and 2.2.12 ac series. Both times they were
backed out, and I don't remember seeing a post here on linux-raid explaining
why.
I noticed this while scanning the linux-kernel archives. This is
Ski Harrison wrote:
> I still get 17MB/sec. I would think I should get
> something like you mention below, 23-24MB/sec, double the plain
> jane WD 4gig DMA33 drive.
Though I still don't know specifically how you can tell whether you are in
udma66 mode or not, from all of my research there's no w
Skip Harrison wrote:
> My main drive with all Linux files on it is a WD 4.3g UDMA 33
> model. I have
> UDMA turned on for this drive (again, a program from WD web site). Using
> "hdparm" to check that dma mode is turned on for _both_ drives (turned on
> automatically by option in make config), I
Kiyan Azarbar wrote:
> I ordered them. What I'm wondering is how the controllers will be
> identified provided I do nothing special to set up the kernel (2.2.10
> with 0723 raid patch). which controller will get hde/f,g/h, and which
> will get hdi/j,hdk/l (if I install two ultra33's in a single
>
Kiyan Azarbar wrote:
> hdd2's event counter: 000b
> hdc2's event counter: 0001
> hdb2's event counter: 000b
> md: superblock update time inconsistency -- using the most recent one
> freshest: hdd2
> md: kicking non-fresh hdc2 from array!
This is indicative of a RAID5 array that was no
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> My experience is that RAID5
> read-performance is almost as high as RAID0 performance when using 4k
> stripe size. In this case both Linux and the disk itself has more chances
> to optimize. (disks will most likely read sequentially due to readahead
> caching, and they will sk
Marc Mutz wrote:
> You should have bought SCSI disks. They may would have been cheaper,
> too, because you need only one controller for three disks. (Sorry -could
> not resist :-)
I know it's fun for all the server purists to knock eide, but it does have
some advantages:
A mythical ~90GB array:
Markus Schulte wrote:
> there are some web servers that nfs mount their document roots from this
> raid 5 array.
>
> 2 hours before it was still working :(
> [snip]
There is a way to fix this! I wrote an informal guide to doing just this
and posted it to the list some time ago. You can find it
Michael McLagan wrote:
>I've determined that there appears to be a problem somewhere
> in the RAID code that is not SMP friendly.
That seems like a premature conclusion. I run RAID on several
multi-processor systems without problems. They are all currently running
2.2.7, with the 2.2.6 raid
Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > I have a system with 12 udma disks, and in practice it's been a
> > nightmare. Once you start using more than two interfaces the
> > auto-tuning code in the kernel ceases to work correctly, so you
> > have to "tune up" each disk after
>
> The tuning code fails?? News
Andy Poling wrote:
> This From address is not helpful at all.
>
> Somebody changed something on vger, and now we can no longer tell who the
> list messages come from. We also cannot reply to the sender.
As is (I believe) typical with these lists, Sender: is filled in with the
list address, but F
Niklas wrote:
> How many ide disks is it possible to use under linux, and how many is it
> "recommended" to use?
Currently, it's possible to use three ide controllers at once for a limit of
6 interfaces. This is a limit in the ide kernel code. Apparently, though,
expanding it should be easy. A
D. Carlos Knowlton wrote:
> When does it look like there will be a RAID fix for the 2.2.10 kernel?
> Otherwise, is anyone aware of another way to get UDMA/66 and RAID
> together?
As others have pointed out recently on this list, you can get raid working
with a 2.2.10 kernel. Ingo posted a fix, w
Joel Fowler wrote:
> Brian Haymore wrote:
> >I have used standard and the UDMA/66 cables and they both get the same
> >performance. The drives are not able to sustain more then about
> >12-18MB/sec on block IO They can burst to bus speed(33 or 66) but
> >not sustain it. No vendor even claim
Jonathan F. Dill wrote:
> That's fantastic--Did you "roll your own" or special order them from
> someplace? How much did they cost? I was also wondering about using
> ribbon with twisted pairs (like some old DEC MicroVax used to use for
> internal SCSI) but I would expect it to be expensive per
I said:
> It is VERY, VERY hard to place 12
> drives (I have two 4 gigs for raid boot/root) inside a case and stay under
> the 18" ide cable restriction!! Many, many cables are sold that
> are longer than this maximum 18" cable, but these cables can and
> will cause errors under udma under linux
Chris R. Brown wrote:
> I've just come back to my RAID project and have run into some
> more problems. I was wondering if anyone on the list has kludged
> three promise ultra 33 cards and one onboard IDE controller together
> in one box. I'm still trying to get a big (128 gig) array going, b
Chris Brown wrote:
> I am trying to build a large IDE RAID-5 array using three
> pdc20246 cards. In order for the three cards to work with linux I
> need to use kernel 2.2.9 with the 2.2.9 IDE patches, but from what
> I've seen on the list and what I've tried myself the 2.2.6 RAID patch
> doe
Hi there!
I'm curious about some of the issues relating to RAID performance under
linux. I don't have a hardware or device driver kind of background though,
so I have a couple of questions for y'all... the meat of this stuff really
isn't explained in the HOWTO's.
I've worked with computers for
James Knowles wrote:
> Do I understand correctly that with RAID compiled into the kernel and
> persistent superblocks used, that I can boot off of a RAID drive without
> initrd or anything else additional?
>
> If not, what is required to boot RAID?
You do have to do a couple of special things, bu
Quick questions, quick answers.
Matthew Economou wrote:
> 1. Where is Martin Bene's failed disk patch?
http://linuxhq.jimpick.com/lnxlists/linux-raid/lr_9904_04/msg00030.html
> 2. I am using the exact same disk configuration and raidtab. Do I
> need to do anything special
> I am planning on building a small SCSI RAID array (using software RAID)
> for my home Linux server. Suppose I have 4 of the same drive (perhaps
> 4GB drives). What happens in a year or two when one of the drives fails
> and I am unable to find a matching replacement?
Linux software raid is pa
> I've got some pretty big problems with my Linux software RAID(-5) array.
> This is what I think happened: Two days ago, the power went out on my file
> server. When the power came back up, the RAID driver automatically
> started re-synchronizing the array. During the re-sync, the power went out
> System is 2.2.6 + raid0145-19990421 + DAC960-2.2.4(production)
> Hardware is Dual PII 450Mhz. 1GB ram. Adaptec 2940U2W (where the raid was)
> with 6 9.5GB drives. System partitions on DAC960 raid 5 hardware raid.
> Kernel compliled on RedHat 5.1 system (gcc 2.7.2.3).
I have a similar configura
Giulio Botto wrote:
> the feature I MOST would have liked in the situation I had at the moment was
> the possibility to update superblocks only and a tool which could read and
> let me write what I wanted in the various superblocks of the
> devices comprised in the array.
I agree that this proced
Giulio Botto wrote:
> We have a similar problem on a 3way RAID5 with three different event
> counters on the three discs. We *KNOW* two of the are synced because
> power went off in seconds between the last two discs (sdc1 and sdb1),
> and we also know that sda1 is not synced because the logs show
74 matches
Mail list logo
