Hi,
While testing raid1 (raidsetfaulty, raidhotremove, raidhotadd, repeat),
I managed to get one raid set in a state where nr_disks was incorrect.
This became a problem when trying to use lilo, because it would only write
to one of the disks (since nr_disks was 1).
With one disk in the set nr_d
Greetings and apologies from the get-go for bothering you!
I'm working my way through implementing RAID-1 on my RH6.2 system
and saw that your email gets referenced on the mkraid -f command.
I'm following the latest Software-RAID HOWTO along with the instructions
available from RedHa
Hi Hugh,
I got the help with the failed-disk as you should see in my previous reply
to the list.
I sent a subscribtion mail on 3rd of July and I got a reply from majordomo
like below. I guess the problems is that my header-lines and my requested
email address don't match. We are changing the
Hi Martin,
When I changed to "failed-disk 1" it works, even if I have to use the
undocumented special force. Thank you for your help!
Now my /proc/mdstat says:
# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid5]
read_ahead 1024 sectors
md0 : active raid1 hda1[0] 64128 blocks
Hi,
I try to configure a RAID-1 system, but I have some problems.
First of all I have tried to send a email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to be part of this list without any
results.
I'm running a Debian 2.2 system (potato). I downloaded the 2.2.16 kernel
and
the raid-2.2.
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 08:31:20AM -0400, Richard Bollinger wrote:
> > Note 2:
> > My linuxsafe label has image=/vmlinuz. I really want image=/safe/vmlinuz,
> with
> > /safe being on my md1 partition. If I do, I get the dreaded:
> ...
> > Fatal: Sorry, don't know how to handle device 0x0901
>
> I
Hello,
I've been searching this list for the answer but I got confused by all the
different approaches. Besides, I don't have /boot on an md partition
as most of you seem to have...
I have a raid-1 setup with the 0.90 raid, for all partitions exept for
/boot. There are several proble
ragg wrote:
> >
> > I'm running S/W raid-1 with 2 18G seagate barracuda on a Initio
> > 1060P U2W SCSI Controller and a C&T 69000 VGA controller for
> > AGP interface on Linux RH 6.2.
> >
> > Initially this works fine, untill I start using S/W raid-1.
> &
This is still a problem for me.
I have had no support or help in any way on this one.
Hugh Bragg wrote:
>
> I'm running S/W raid-1 with 2 18G seagate barracuda on a Initio
> 1060P U2W SCSI Controller and a C&T 69000 VGA controller for
> AGP interface on Linux RH 6.2.
>
s:
which shows that it hasn't noticed that anything has failed.
I am trying
raidsetfaulty /dev/md2 /dev/md1
to try to tell the raid1 set that one of the raid0's has failed, but
as yet it hasn't completed.
Admittedly it isn't smoke and flames, or even an Oops, but it is l
> Just to set the record straight, no layering of RAID arrays works
> with the 2.2patch set.
>
That's interesting since I have several systems with 1 over 0
including one which is one large partition mirrored as with a pair of
smaller disks in a 0.
Both of these systems seem to work well with
> With RAID1 there is little point in adding a "spare disk" - you can just
> add another disk to the running array, ie:
You cannot "add" a third to to a two-way RAID1.
You can create a new three-way RAID1 if you want.
But you can't (AFAIK) change the number of disk is the base array.
> md0: sda1
Hi,
On Thu, 1 Jun 2000, John Saunders wrote:
> I have a RH6.1 box with two mirrored drives in a RAID1 config.
>
> I am wanting to add a spare disk and would like advice on the correct
> procedure for adding it to the existing config.
With RAID1 there is little point in adding a "spare disk" -
> 1. Bring the system down.
> 2. Install the spare drive
Coward :-)
> 3. Boot up and edit the /etc/raidtab to include the spare drive
That is not needed, but is good practice.
[[ What I do is to dump the PSB info to /etc/raidtab every night ]]
> 4. fdisk the drive to be identical to the mirror
> -Original Message-
> From: Neil Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2000 4:29 AM
> To: Corin Hartland-Swann
> Cc: Theo Van Dinter; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: RAID 1+0
>
> On Thursday June 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
>
Hi
I have a RH6.1 box with two mirrored drives in a RAID1 config.
I am wanting to add a spare disk and would like advice on the correct
procedure for adding it to the existing config.
What I planned was:
1. Bring the system down.
2. Install the spare drive
3. Boot up and edit the /etc/raidtab
On Thu, Jun 01, 2000 at 10:23:21AM +0100, Corin Hartland-Swann wrote:
> So, is 0+1 the only combination currently allowed?
To my knowledge, yes.
> Is anybody else interested in seeing 1+0, 5+0, etc?
Personally, I would say that if you're going to go for 5+0 or 5+1, you should
really get HW RAID
Neil,
On Thu, 1 Jun 2000, Neil Brown wrote:
> On Thursday June 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > So, is 0+1 the only combination currently allowed?
>
> Just to set the record straight, no layering of RAID arrays works with
> the 2.2patch set.
Ohmygod! _Thank_You_ for pointing this out. I remembe
On Thursday June 1, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Theo,
>
> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> > On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 09:10:30AM -0400, Andy Poling wrote:
> > > That's the error you will get any time that you try to layer raid levels
> > > that md does not support layering. It's a
Theo,
On Wed, 31 May 2000, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 09:10:30AM -0400, Andy Poling wrote:
> > That's the error you will get any time that you try to layer raid levels
> > that md does not support layering. It's a safety belt mechanism of sorts.
>
> Arguably, any combinat
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 10:17:16AM -0400, Theo Van Dinter wrote:
> NxP: 1/(PN-1) vs N/(PN-1)
Just to correct myself -- this equation actually doesn't work after thinking
about it. It works for P=2, but after that, the whole game changes...
Regardless, striped mirrors is usually considered
- Original Message -
From: Andy Poling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Corin Hartland-Swann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: RAID 1+0
> On Wed, 31 May 2000, Corin Hartland-Swann wrote:
> > I am trying t
On Wed, May 31, 2000 at 09:10:30AM -0400, Andy Poling wrote:
> That's the error you will get any time that you try to layer raid levels
> that md does not support layering. It's a safety belt mechanism of sorts.
Arguably, any combination should be allowed, but 0+1 and 1+0 at minimum.
> Either w
Richard Bollinger wrote:
>
> Thanks for the feedback. I've added a few hints to the readme file at:
> http://www.elliott-turbo.com/lilo/
>
> Hints: 1) Use boot=/dev/mdX and root=/dev/mdY as appropriate...
> lilo will figure out the underlying partitions for you
> 2) Add default= to make mi
On Wed, 31 May 2000, Corin Hartland-Swann wrote:
> I am trying to set up RAID1 + RAID0 over four disks. I have
>
> md1 = sda2 sdb2 (RAID 1)
> md2 = sdc2 sdd2 (RAID 1)
> md3 = md1 md2(RAID 0)
>
> I can successfully mkraid these devices, but when I try to mke2fs I g
Hi there,
I am trying to set up RAID1 + RAID0 over four disks. I have
md1 = sda2 sdb2 (RAID 1)
md2 = sdc2 sdd2 (RAID 1)
md3 = md1 md2(RAID 0)
I can successfully mkraid these devices, but when I try to mke2fs I get
the message "Got md request, not good..."
I found the mess
lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "John Coffman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2000 9:41 PM
Subject: Re: getting lilo to create map with raid 1 on root fs
> A little feedback on this patch
...
> Note 1:
> boot=/dev/md0 wasn't very obvious. I didn't realize
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 n
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...
Could someone explain to me the advantages/disavantages
On Tue, 30 May 2000, Michael Robinton wrote:
> The usual problem is that you are booting with a kernel that has not had
> rdev done directly on the kernel -- lilo won't do it for you when you use
> initrd or boot from an image file.
Yeah, I suspected that too, only to discover that the
>
> I am currently having problems mounting my root file system that
> is set up with RAID-1. The initrd image I am using conatins all the raid
> tools, and successfully starts all the raid devices, but then I get the
> familiar message "Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mo
Hello,
I am currently having problems mounting my root file system that
is set up with RAID-1. The initrd image I am using conatins all the raid
tools, and successfully starts all the raid devices, but then I get the
familiar message "Kernel panic: VFS: Unable to mount root
I'm running S/W raid-1 with 2 18G seagate barracuda on a Initio
1060P U2W SCSI Controller and a C&T 69000 VGA controller for
AGP interface on Linux RH 6.2.
Initially this works fine, untill I start using S/W raid-1.
My XFont-server fails immediately.
If I already have XFree86-3.3.6-2
[Ion Badulescu]
> In article
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you
>wrote:
>
> > I am having trouble using Linux RAID on a Sun Ultra1 running
> > 2.2.15.
>
> You need an additional patch, just plain vanilla 2.2.15 + raid-0.90 won't
> do on a sparc. Red Hat have it in their 2.2.14-12 source rpm, but I'm
PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Problems creating RAID-1 on Linux 2.2.15/Sparc64
>
> In article
> you wrote:
>
> > I am having trouble using Linux RAID on a Sun Ultra1 running
> > 2.2.15.
>
> You need an additional patch, just plain vanilla 2.2.15 +
> raid-0.
In article
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> you wrote:
> I am having trouble using Linux RAID on a Sun Ultra1 running
> 2.2.15.
You need an additional patch, just plain vanilla 2.2.15 + raid-0.90 won't
do on a sparc. Red Hat have it in their 2.2.14-12 source rpm, but I'm
attaching it here, for convenie
Hello,
I am having trouble using Linux RAID on a Sun Ultra1 running
2.2.15. I have two identical SCSI disks, partitioned the same, and am
trying to set up a RAID-1 mirror between two slices. Both slices are
currently unused and unomunted. I have compiled all the various RAID
Hello
Using raidtools .90 and kernel 2.2.13, I've tried to mount a raid at
startup.
It 0xfd, it mounts correctly if I type
$ raidstart /dev/md0
$ mount -t ext2 /dev/md0 /disco
but while it tries to auto-mount, it gives the message:
...md_personality_3...
...md_run returned -22...
Thanks for re
Chris,
I'm seeing the same problem here with a plain vanilla RH 6.2.
Being new to RAID, I wasn't sure it was a problem until I
saw your msg. Since it's on a server we never shutdown, it's
not a problem for us but if anyone figures out why, I'd like
to know.
It only seems to happen if you place
This made the errors on boot and shutdown go away, however, I'm still not able to
go to runlevel one and un-mount / and then do a raidstop. It doens't complain
about:
umount /dev/md0
but if I type mount immediately after this I still get /dev/md0 mounted to / in
read-write mode. I've checked and
Hi there,
On Wed, 24 May 2000, Chris Tooley wrote:
> Turning off RAID for md0 md: md0 still mounted.
> /dev/md0: Device or resource busy
> [FAILED]
> Please standby while rebooting the system...
> ***
I have a problem that I am having a hard time figuring out.
I just set up a new server with Red Hat 6.2, with 2 20GB IDE ata-66 drives.
I partitioned each drive into two partitions one swap of 150MB and the
second into 9630MB. I configured /dev/md0 for / to boot of the 9630MB mirror
and /dev/md1
hi
i manage to setup Software-RAID-1 but i am not sure
when it will do the mirroring by itself? please help
to clarify it, thanks in advanced, :-)
regards,
Siew Chin
__
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messe
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
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 in lilo and was unable to boot
except by floppy.
I
On Wed, 10 May 2000, Martin Munt wrote:
> Rich/Chance,
>
> I had EXACTLY the same problem. This post prompted me to fix it.
> Thanks a lot.
[ ... ]
I followed Richard Bollinger's advice, reordering the disks in my root
RAID-1 then rerunning lilo. With sda
l attempt to boot my kernel from a raid-1 array using
Michael Robinton's excellent root-raid howto and RH6.0's lilo, I
built
the RH6.2 lilo source RPM (LILO-0_21-15_SRC.RPM).
The RPM has the following patches:
Patch0: lilo-0.21-include.patch
Patch1:
t;
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, May 08, 2000 4:25 PM
Subject: Lilo RAID-1 woes
> Hi,
>
> I've been trying to get Lilo to work with Linux software RAID-1. I'm
> using the patches from Richard Bollinger's post from 5/4/2000, and
> things almost work. I
Hi,
I've been trying to get Lilo to work with Linux software RAID-1. I'm
using the patches from Richard Bollinger's post from 5/4/2000, and
things almost work. I can use lilo to update the boot sector and
maps, but lilo will not boot unless I enter a valid kernel label at
the
I have been using Linux 2.2.x and RAID 1 happily.
Because of netfilter, I must move to Linux 2.3.15 or higher. It seems that
RAID 1 was disabled from 2.3.15 and above. The only options available are
Raid 0 or Linear. Even in the kernels where RAID1 is an available option,
2.3.25 for example
hello
sir,
I want to implement RAID-1 on my pentium PC having linux
with Kernel 2.0.36 on it and I have downloaded the
raid-patch(raid0145-19990309-2.0.36 ) and
raidtools(raidtools-19990824-0.90.tar.gz) from
ftp://ftp.fi.kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/raid/alpha.
Now, my
Someone out there help me. I'm not really sure of how to configure the
software raid on my box. This is what I have done. I have two SCSI disks in
my machine, both 8.5 gig. The sda disk is the boot disk with all my data. I
want the sdb disk to be my raid disk. So far I fdisked the second drive
onl
Hi!
Somebody uttered around Apr 27 2000:
> > Thanks - where can I find the archive?
> >
> One is at http://kernelnotes.org/lnxlists/linux-raid/
>
> > Also - is it a pretty stable patch? (This is a production server)
> >
> I don't know, sorry.
I'm running 2.2.14 with mingos raid patch and th
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:
>
>
> BTW, I was pleased to discover that Linux had absolutely no problems with
> Ultra160-SCSI - 96MB/s isn't bad at all, is it?
>
> I was hoping that RAID-1 would 'stripe' reads between the disks,
> i
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,
> > increasing read performance to RAID-0 levels, but leaving write
> > performance at singl
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?
>
5-disk SCA backplane connected to Channel A
The disks all have the following partition table:
partition 120M/boot
partition 2 4G/
partition 314G/home
I'm planning to set the root partition up with RAID-1 across sda2, sdb2,
sdc2 and keep a time-lapsed &
My thanks to Erich for helping me out with this. The explicit
directions below were all I needed. I am now running RAID5 on the
patched 2.2.14 kernel, with the Promise Ultra66. Erich deserves his "2
cents"!
I was worried about just swapping in the Ultra card for the EIDE Max
card, but to my pl
On Sun, 16 Apr 2000, James Manning wrote:
> [Gregory Leblanc]
> > > Recovery is a tad simpler with raid1 done at the lower level simply
> > > because none of the md device ever "dies", just one falls
> > > into degraded
> > > and you can skip an mkraid and let normal recovery take over.
> > >
[Gregory Leblanc]
> > Recovery is a tad simpler with raid1 done at the lower level simply
> > because none of the md device ever "dies", just one falls
> > into degraded
> > and you can skip an mkraid and let normal recovery take over.
> > Of course,
> > that leaves the raid1 read balancing alg
> -Original Message-
> From: James Manning [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Sunday, April 16, 2000 9:07 AM
> To: Werner Reisberger
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Combining RAID 0 and RAID 1
>
[snip]
>
> Recovery is a tad simpler with raid1 don
[Werner Reisberger]
> I am wondering if there is a possibility to use RAID 0 and RAID 1 together,
> i. e. mirroring two RAID 0 devices?
Absolutely. The most common setup appears to be:
drives 1+2: md0 (raid0)
drives 3+4: md1 (raid0)
md0+md1:md2 (raid1)
> Two general questions:
&g
Peter Palfrader schrieb am Sonntag, dem 16. April 2000:
> > I am wondering if there is a possibility to use RAID 0 and RAID 1 together,
> > i. e. mirroring two RAID 0 devices?
>
> Yes, it's called Raid 0-1, but I've never tried it.
Argl, make it
Hi Werner!
Werner Reisberger schrieb am Sonntag, dem 16. April 2000:
> I am wondering if there is a possibility to use RAID 0 and RAID 1 together,
> i. e. mirroring two RAID 0 devices?
Yes, it's called Raid 0-1, but I've never tried it.
> - Is there an archive for this mai
My RAID 1 device is working now after patching the kernel (thanks to all
responding).
I am wondering if there is a possibility to use RAID 0 and RAID 1 together,
i. e. mirroring two RAID 0 devices?
Two general questions:
- Are there any instructions for the new raidtools what to do in cases
t; Thomas
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Leung Yau Wai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Saturday, April 15, 2000 6:26 AM
> Subject: RAID-1 rescue
>
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I have a hot-plug SCSI modules installed in
Dear all,
I have a hot-plug SCSI modules installed in my Linux system. And
I have two SCSI HD are running in RAID-1. One of the HDs fail. And I put
back a new HD for replacement! How can I resync them?
My current conf:
RH 6.2
One '/' parition only
two HD
Erich,
I am planning on trying to use the Promise Ultra66 tonight (want to beef
up performance). I currently have RAID5 running with a Promise
EIDE-MaxII card quite nicely. I know about the 2.2.14-B1 patch for
RAID, but which promise patch are you referring to? I see that Promise
has a beta dr
Ok, here are the notes that I wrote to myself of how to get Software
RAID and the Promise Ultra/66 in the same kernel:
1. Don't use the RedHat version of the 2.2.14 kernel. It has
too many patches, so the other patches won't work.
2. Do unpack the linux-2.2.14.tar.gz file.
3. Apply the ide.2.
> It's definitely possible to use 2.2.14 with the Software RAID patch
> and with the Promise Ultra/66 patch at the same time. I'm doing it
> right now. Download the plain-vanilla 2.2.14 kernel. Apply this
> patch first:
>
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hedrick/old/ide.2.2.14
>
I'm the one who originally posted the question, and now I may have an
answer (with help from the list):
> I've tried doing that, 2.2.14 adding both patchs.
> mostly they failed everywhere. then once I did it get it in, and compile,
> it still never worked right, I change to 2.3 kernel, even tho
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000, Tony Grant wrote:
> Erich wrote:
>
> > Any clues? I feel like I've done everything according to the
> > instructions, and I feel like I'm very close to getting it to work,
> > but it's still not working. Have I left out something important in
> > the kernel config? Or
Erich wrote:
> Any clues? I feel like I've done everything according to the
> instructions, and I feel like I'm very close to getting it to work,
> but it's still not working. Have I left out something important in
> the kernel config? Or did I need a RAID patch to the 2.2.14 kernel to
> get
Here's my hardware configuration:
One ATA66 drive attached to the MB
Two ATA66 drives attached to a Promise Ultra/66 controller
In order to get the Promise Ultra/66 controller to work, I had to
apply a patch to the 2.2.14 kernel. I took the standard kernel, ran
the patch, configured it, compi
Not only is it perfectly reproducible on your machine, it was on mine,
too! Get the new kernel patch from Ingo Molnar:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/raid-2.2.14-B1
and the accompanying tools:
http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/raidtools-dangerous-0.90-20
mage=/boot/vmlinuz-backup
label=LinuxBackup
read-only
When lilo is run successfully, it creates files /boot/boot.0300 and
/boot/boot.1600 which are the boot sectors from /dev/hda and /dev/hdc,
respectively, which are in turn the components of the RAID-1 set:
md0 : active raid1 hdc1
Hello,
I'm using /dev/md0 as root filesystem. When I boot after / has not been
unmounted, I get the following:
created md0
bind
bind
running:
now!
sda6's event counter: 0092
sdb6's event counter: 0092
md: md0 raid array is not clean.. starting background reconstruction
md0: max total re
e. the only place where you'll ever see the error is with
external programs trying to work on the unterlying physical devices of a
raid array; the only known program where the problem surfaces is lilo.
>So with the fix for A) I would have to end up backing up my data and
>recreating the
is a failed disk.
>c) there's a bunch of bugs in the lilo - raidpatch that prevents it from
> working on arrays with failed disks; the phantom disk from bug a)
> unfortunately qualifies.
>
> I've got patches for a) (fix mkraid diskcount if creating in degraded mode)
&g
At 16:26 06.04.00, you wrote:
> > raid will boot quite nicely from a standard lilo if the config file is
> > properly set up. I have several raid1 and raid5 (with raid one boot
> > partions) running that use standard lilo on both scsi and ide systems.
Query: is /boot on a raid device that was cre
On Wed, 5 Apr 2000, Michael Robinton wrote:
> raid will boot quite nicely from a standard lilo if the config file is
> properly set up. I have several raid1 and raid5 (with raid one boot
> partions) running that use standard lilo on both scsi and ide systems.
See, but I didn't change lilos an
On Wed, 5 Apr 2000, Sean Millichamp wrote:
> After that, I modified LILO to mount the root partition off of /dev/md0,
> ran lilo (it worked), and rebooted fine. Less the 48 hours later I am
> trying to rerun lilo on the same machine and it won't run. The only
> change I made were to delete the
It need not be destructive.
set up raid 1 mirroring with the original disk marked as failed, create
the raid and run it. cp -a old disk / to /dev/mdx / set up lilo for
raid1, make a boot diskett, boot from it and mount the raid1. fix the
raidtab and raidhotadd the old disk to the array
First of all, let me say that I followed the recently posted instructions
to this list on how to take an active drive and mirror it without having
to backup and then restore the data. It worked flawlessly! Thanks to
everyone who contributed information.
After that, I modified LILO to mount the
On Wed, 05 Apr 2000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> Is there any sign of RAID-1 that's non-destructive? This is making my
> life living hell right now. :)
RAID-1 with persistent superblocks will require the last few KB of your
disk for the superblock.
But besides
Is there any sign of RAID-1 that's non-destructive? This is making my
life living hell right now. :)
I haven't been keeping up, so if there is a 2.2 patch or perhaps
something in 2.3 that supports it, I would be most gracious (perhaps a method
that isn't d
> -Original Message-
> From: Pete Rossi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 31, 2000 3:34 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Need help with software RAID-1
>
>
>
> I am trying to get RAID-1 running with dual SCSI drives.
>
> I read the
I am trying to get RAID-1 running with dual SCSI drives.
I read the Software-RAID HOWTO and followed the steps outlined
there. However.. when I get to the part to run mkraid,
it returns the following..
> # mkraid /dev/md0
> handling MD device /dev/md0
> analyzing super-block
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Leandro Lacalle Turbino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 10:31 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Alfredo Junior
> Subject: raid 1
>
>
> Dear Friend,
>
> I'm trying to do a RAID level 1
Dear Friend,
I'm trying to do a RAID level 1 on my Linux server, but I have some problems, if you
can give me a tip, I will stay happy:
Environment:
Linux Kernel 2.2.12 (Red Hat 6)
Server with 2 disks and 2 SCSI controlers, with 8Gb each.
Devices /dev/sda5 and /dev/sdb5
the file /etc/raidtab c
k.
>
> Yep.
I had a night-mare after reading the boot-howto... :-)
> > But is it really stable enough for a normal RAID 1 System with two
> > IDE-Disks? There is a /boot Partition (now RAID) and a / , /home and
> > /db-Partition on each Disk which I want to mirror.
>
>
On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Andreas Martmann wrote:
> Hello
>
> I have to install a RAID 1 System in order to mirror all partitions (exept the
> /boot partition, I think). The Problem is that I haven´t made this before, and I
> haven´t found a documentation that gives me the answers I n
ver and
over. I'll do that for week, if it's stable, I'm try to mirror /dev/md0
with other two maxtor's.
4:38pm up 3 day, 3:38, 1 user, load average: 1.32, 0.82, 1.28
No problems so far.
As long as you don't try scsi, probly wont have any problems either.
On Tue, 28
Hello
I have to install a RAID 1 System in order to mirror all partitions (exept the
/boot partition, I think). The Problem is that I haven´t made this before, and I
haven´t found a documentation that gives me the answers I need.
There are three HowTos available the old (normal) RAID HowTo for
On Thu, 9 Mar 2000, Holger Kiehl wrote:
> > a) Make RAID bootdisk.
> > b) boot up and mkraid
> >
> To do the mkraid you need a raidtab file and for that you need an
> editor or it must be copied to the floppy when you create it.
Certainly, but Slackware is nice in that it lets you do whatever yo
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
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
c) modify 'setup' so it understands your md drives
d) install away as if nothing was different
e) boot with
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
/dev/sdb3 - /home - 600Mb
/dev/sdb4 - /var - 600Mb
/dev/sdc:(2nd 2.1G SCSI)
/dev/sdc1 - SWAP - 100Mb
/dev/sdc2 - / - 800Mb
/dev/sdc3 - /home - 600Mb
/dev/sdc4 - /var - 600Mb
RAID(1):
/dev/md0 = sdb3 & sdc3(/home)
/dev/md1 = sdb4 & sdc4(/var)
Now the first time I tried to
get RA
1 - 100 of 421 matches
Mail list logo
