[Wishart, Aaron M. (James Tower)]
> I have a raid5 file system consisting of 8, 9-gig quantum scsi drives (scsi
> id 0-6, 8). The drive with the scsi id of 1 failed. I replaced the drive
> and ran "raidhotadd /dev/scb /dev/md0" It appeared to run so I left for the
> weekend. When I came in thi
I have a raid5 file system consisting of 8, 9-gig quantum scsi drives (scsi
id 0-6, 8). The drive with the scsi id of 1 failed. I replaced the drive
and ran "raidhotadd /dev/scb /dev/md0" It appeared to run so I left for the
weekend. When I came in this morning the syslogd was using 75% of the
What are the steps to replacing a failed drive in RAID 5.
My setup is:
Kernel 2.0.36
raidtools-19990128-0.90
12 4.3G Drives
1 Adaptec 2944
1 NCR 553c8xx
The kernel decided to kick my first drive out of the RAID. Upon reboot it would
determine the drive was out of sync and would kick it again.
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Tal Lichtenstein wrote:
> I just installed RedHat 6.0 (which contains kernel v2.2.5) on a dual Pentium
> Pro machine.
> The computer has a 2940UW SCSI controller with 3 external 9GB disks.
>
> Each disk has a 130MB swap partition and a 8.6GB Linux partition.
> The three Linu
Hello everyone!
I just installed RedHat 6.0 (which contains kernel v2.2.5) on a dual Pentium
Pro machine.
The computer has a 2940UW SCSI controller with 3 external 9GB disks.
Each disk has a 130MB swap partition and a 8.6GB Linux partition.
The three Linux partitions are configured as a raid 5 d
Hi!
I just installed RedHat 6.0 (which contains kernel v2.2.5) on a dual Pentium
Pro machine.
The computer has a 2940UW SCSI controller with 3 external 9GB disks.
Each disk has a 130MB swap partition and a 8.6GB Linux partition.
The three Linux partitions are configured as a raid 5 device /dev/m
23,x203
http://www.csi.cc Computer Science Innovations
http://www.csi.cc/~mike My home page
FAX 407-676-2355
- Original Message -
From: Chris R. Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Mike Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 12:02 PM
Subjec
> Forgive my novice question, but is this implying that with a SCSI
> arrangement, failure of one drive will not lock/affect the SCSI bus?
Failure of a **DRIVE** should not effect the SCSI bus at all.
Failure of the *controller* (real failures are very rare, normally it is power
loss) can cause
Carlos Carvalho wrote:
> It's been said that with IDE, if the master drive fails the slave one
> is also unavailable, which means that you lose TWO drives (I haven't
Forgive my novice question, but is this implying that with a SCSI
arrangement, failure of one drive will not lock/affect the SCSI b
[...]
> We will infact put each IDE drive on its own channel, but our testing
> reveals that RAID5 doesn't know when to stop (or maybe how to
> stop gracefully) If two drives go out I would hope that the array
> just stop, not corrupt the data, or continue operating.
>
> This same secene
Chris R. Brown ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 17 May 1999 21:08:
>We've experienced a few odd anomalies during testing our IDE RAID-5
>array ( 6 x 16gb =80g).
>
>We started with a good running array and did an e2fsck to ensure its
>integrity...
>
>We simulated a drive failure by disconnecti
> We've experienced a few odd anomalies during testing our IDE RAID-5
> array ( 6 x 16gb =80g).
raidtools 0.90 with raid0145 patches ?
> We simulated a drive failure by disconnecting a drive's power, and if
> the IDE channel contained a second drive in the RAID5 array, the array
> was permanen
We've experienced a few odd anomalies during testing our IDE RAID-5
array ( 6 x 16gb =80g).
We started with a good running array and did an e2fsck to ensure its
integrity...
We simulated a drive failure by disconnecting a drive's power, and if
the IDE channel contained a second drive in the RA
> 1.Is the array still useable after it looses a drive?
I had certainly gained the impression that that was the purpose.
> We've yanked the power out of a running drive two seperate
> times, and it has not worked correctly afterwards.
Are you sure that the FS was OK before you star
Hello all,
We have implemented a RAID-5 array on one of our systems here,
and are doing some testing on it. It's a 6 disk array of 16GB drives
all on /dev/md0 with the e2fs made with 'mke2fs -b 4096 -R stride=8
/dev/md0'.
1.Is the array still useable after it looses a drive?
Giulio Botto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 10:44:59PM -0400, m. allan noah thusly
shaped the electrons:
> > try
> > raidhotadd /dev/md0 /dev/hdjx
> > raithotadd /dev/md0 /dev/hdix
>
> I\'m afraid this will not work as the md device is not started yet
...
was this abou
On Fri, Apr 30, 1999 at 10:44:59PM -0400, m. allan noah thusly shaped the electrons:
> try
> raidhotadd /dev/md0 /dev/hdjx
> raithotadd /dev/md0 /dev/hdix
I'm afraid this will not work as the md device is not started yet ...
>
> or whatever your drives are.
> this should put them back into the
On Fri, 30 Apr 1999, James O'Kane wrote:
Hi,
> I stumbled through the setup of our raid and it was working smoothly. So
> then I wanted to test how things would recover from a failed disk. To
> simulate a failed disk I did a dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb1 which
> effectively crashed the ra
try
raidhotadd /dev/md0 /dev/hdjx
raithotadd /dev/md0 /dev/hdix
or whatever your drives are.
this should put them back into the array, and begin syncing.
can you still access all of the data on your drives now? even with a two
disk failure? 8 ide drives- wow.
allan
"so don't tell us it can't
I stumbled through the setup of our raid and it was working smoothly. So
then I wanted to test how things would recover from a failed disk. To
simulate a failed disk I did a dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdb1 which
effectively crashed the raid. I stopped the raid and started ckraid
--force-check --fix /
Hi All,
I have a RAID 5 array with 8 IDE disks. Recently,
it appears that one of the IDE controllers failed
causing its two disks to become unavailable. When
I fixed the controller, the two disks are visible,
but the RAID claims they are out of synch (ie, time
inconsistency --- see below). Have
21 matches
Mail list logo
