Check out the section on that in the Software-RAID HOWTO. You can get it
from http://www.LinuxDoc.org/HOWTO/Software-RAID-HOWTO-6.html#ss6.1 but a
mirror closer to you might be better.
Greg
> -Original Message-
> From: Martin Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, Augu
Hi,
> > I'm sorry but I do not know how to apply this patch.. when I do #patch
> > raidreconf-0.0.2.patch
> > It just sits there... can u tell me how ya'll made did it? Thank you in
> > advance.
>
> Did you type "patch < raidreconf-0.0.2.patch" ?
> ---^^^
>
> btw. what is this p
David Grimes wrote:
>
> I'm sorry but I do not know how to apply this patch.. when I do #patch
> raidreconf-0.0.2.patch
> It just sits there... can u tell me how ya'll made did it? Thank you in
> advance.
Did you type "patch < raidreconf-0.0.2.patch" ?
---^^^
btw. what is this p
can u send your raid configuration file(s)? maybe, I will be able to help
then...
> -Original Message-
> From: Sandro Dentella [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2000 2:23 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: help: read-ahead not set: what is it???
>
> Hi,
>
>
Leblanc
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject:Re: HELP with autodetection on booting
[Gregory Leblanc]
> I started seeing this when I blew away my RAID0 arrays and put RAID1 arrays
> on my home machine. I suspect that this is cause by RedHat putting
> something in the initscripts to start
[Gregory Leblanc]
> I started seeing this when I blew away my RAID0 arrays and put RAID1 arrays
> on my home machine. I suspect that this is cause by RedHat putting
> something in the initscripts to start the RAID arrays AND the RAID slices
> being set to type fd (RAID autodetect), but I haven't
[Jieming Wang]
> autorun ...
> considering sdb1 ...
> adding sdb1 ...
> adding sda1 ...
> created md0
> bind
> bind
> running:
> now!
> sdb1's event counter: 000a
> sda1's event counter: 000a
Looks like a couple of partitions with type fd, looking great for
autostart by the raid code
I started seeing this when I blew away my RAID0 arrays and put RAID1 arrays
on my home machine. I suspect that this is cause by RedHat putting
something in the initscripts to start the RAID arrays AND the RAID slices
being set to type fd (RAID autodetect), but I haven't been able to confirm
this.
any disks THEN it will destroy your data.
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Matthew Burke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: "James Manning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Monday, May 29, 2
TECTED]>
> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2000 5:50 AM
> Subject: Re: HELP!!! Broken raid0
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 29 May 2000, James Manning wrote:
>
> > Sure makes it look like hdc3 has some major issues. It has a partition
> > ty
On Mon, 29 May 2000, James Manning wrote:
> Sure makes it look like hdc3 has some major issues. It has a partition
> type of fd, but invalid raid superblock. Makes me wonder if e2fsck
> didn't get run on hdc3 itself and it "fixed" that last part (hope not
> since it may have done some real su
[Matthew Burke]
> On Sun, 28 May 2000, James Manning wrote:
> > [Matthew Burke]
> > > e2fsck 1.18, 11-nov-1999 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
> > > e2fsck: Attempt to read block from filesystem resulted in short read while
> > > trying to open /dev/md1
> > > Could this be a zero-length partition?
>
>
[Matthew Burke]
> e2fsck 1.18, 11-nov-1999 for EXT2 FS 0.5b, 95/08/09
> e2fsck: Attempt to read block from filesystem resulted in short read while
> trying to open /dev/md1
> Could this be a zero-length partition?
>
> /dev/md1 is not mounted, but it is properly set up in /etc/raidtab
>
> raidsta
>
Cc: "Pavel Kucera" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, May 18, 2000 4:49 PM
Subject: Re: Help with RAID5 damage please
>
> Hi there,
>
> On Thu, 18 May 2000, Richard Bollinger wrote:
> > > May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdh
Hi there,
On Thu, 18 May 2000, Richard Bollinger wrote:
> > May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdh2's event counter: 000a
> > May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdg2's event counter: 0008
> > May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hdf2's event counter: 0008
> > May 18 16:38:27 backup kernel: hde2's
Your logs indicate that the Raid code decided to look at hdh2 as gospel and
dismiss all of the rest. The easiest solution is to temporarily disconnect
or disable hdh2, then restart the system. It will accept the data on all of
the other drives as OK now and start up the array in "degraded" mode
> -Original Message-
> From: Edward Schernau [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 17, 2000 11:19 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: help interpret tiobench.pl results?
>
> I get:
>
> File Block Num Seq ReadRand Read Seq Write Rand
> Write
> DirSi
Volker Wysk wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> RedHat 6.1's graphical install program has destroyed my RAID0 volume,
> which is really bad for me.
>
> I was going to install a second Linux, on a separate partition, and chose
> "create RAID partition", and to *not* format it. After that, I couldn't
> mount i
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
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
[ Friday, February 11, 2000 ] "Hübner, Dietmar, VMD-TWR-IEA" wrote:
> I have linux 2.2.13 (SuSE) and a problem with a raid1.
>
> #cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [1 linear] [2 raid0] [3 raid1]
> read_ahead not set
> md0 : inactive
> md1 : inactive
> md2 : inactive
> md3 : inactive
>
> Do you
Title: RE: help, help, help
Here is the main clue as to what is wrong **
>#cat /proc/mdstat
>Personalities : [1 linear] [2 raid0] [3 raid1]
>read_ahead not set
>md0 : inactive
>md1 : inactive
>md2 : inactive
>md3 : inactive
Any time you see a /proc/mdstat li
With the boot disk, if it pauses and asks for parameters you can state
"root=/dev/sdb1" after you copy everything over. Once booted, copy it back
to the new drive and all should be well.
At 05:39 PM 12/20/1999 +0200, Simo Varis wrote:
>I got nice suprise, a disk on old (0.36.6) RAID1 array is
heers,
Bruno Prior [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Luca Berra
> Sent: 10 December 1999 14:07
> To: linux raid
> Subject: Re: HELP-- identical disks but fdisk sees them different
>
>
Hi,
i had the same problem and i found the following solution:
try to delete or set the "dos compatibility flag" on both drives.
You have to do this with fdisks c command.
For mee it looks as if one of your drives has this flag set and the another not.
I hope this helps
On Thu, Dec 09, 1999 at 11:09:18PM +, Lyndon David wrote:
> I am just setting up a system and have put in two identical disks as hda and hdc.
>fdisk
> sees hda as having 255 heads and 63 sectors but hdc as having 16 heads and 63
>sectors !
in addition to what has been said try zeroing the p
> Thanks for the clear explanation. I gave it a try, but it didn't
> work. It may be because I used the 'old' raid as compiled into the
> standard 2.2.13 kernel.
That'll be exactly why. Don't use the old RAID code unless you have a good
reason to.
> I've been very confused by the various raid
>
I had exactly the same experience with 2.2.13ac3 kernel, only setting disks to
NORMAL made fdisk to see them as two identical disks.
Does this influence the speed of disks in any way ?
On pi±, 10 gru 1999, Stephen Walton wrote:
>I had _exactly_ the same problem. The only way I found around it
Check your bios settings.. See if one is in LBA mode,etc..
Just ask you bios to autodetect the drives.
I believe the bios has three ways of accessing drives.. each way makes the harddrive
report different heads/sectors/etc.
David Robinson.
Lyndon David wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am in a bit of a p
I had _exactly_ the same problem. The only way I found around it was to
go into the BIOS and manually set both disks to NORMAL instead of LBA.
Attempting to set both to LBA didn't work. This is with RedHat 6.0 with
the 2.2.5-22 kernel. Perhaps this is fixed in a later kernel?
--
Stephen Walton
Bruno Prior wrote on 3/12/99 9:39:
>This is a little unorthodox,
>but try the following
Thanks for the clear explanation. I gave it a try, but it didn't work. It may be
because I used the 'old' raid as compiled into the standard 2.2.13 kernel. I've been
very confused by the various raid doc
; From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of David Cunningham
> Sent: 03 December 1999 02:26
> To: Jim Ford; linux-raid
> Subject: Re: Help on root fs using raid-0
>
>
> I've done this on raid-1. I assume the procedure for raid-0 will be the
> same. Her
I've done this on raid-1. I assume the procedure for raid-0 will be the
same. Here is how I do it. I'm not guaranteeing this is the best way:
First I'll make some assumptions. First you would like to boot to your root
md0 filesystem. Second, you have a kernel that is new enough to support
bo
Drenning Bruce wrote:
>
> I've set up a couple of red hat 6.1 servers. All partitions are mirrored
> except /boot. I re-compiled the kernel to include the SCSI driver & RAID1
> personality. I have not been able to create a working rescue procedure.
> Following red hat's new procedure - boot from
Ingo Molnar wrote:
> chunksize does have an important meaning in the linear case: it's
> 'rounding'. We cannot change this unilaterally (it breaks backwards
What is "rounding" mean in the linear case? Is this the rounding of each partition
that is part of the MD drive?
>
> compatibility), and i
Chris,
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 21:40:37 +0100, KS wrote:
>We just had some memory added in our server that is on some remote location.
>The guy also switched the disks that were in the raid1.
>He connected them to wrong cables, when he realised that sth is wrong,
>he connected them like before and a
James,
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999 08:26:19 -0800 (PST), Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
> I vote for maintaining the Doc's , [...]
And do you volunteer to? :-)
Regards,
Robert
Hello Ingo,
On Fri, 26 Nov 1999, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> chunksize does have an important meaning in the linear case: it's
> 'rounding'. We cannot change this unilaterally (it breaks backwards
> compatibility), and it does make sense i believe. [certain disks serve
> requests faster which h
chunksize does have an important meaning in the linear case: it's
'rounding'. We cannot change this unilaterally (it breaks backwards
compatibility), and it does make sense i believe. [certain disks serve
requests faster which have proper alignment and size. I do not think we
should assume that a
On Fri, Nov 26, 1999 at 09:43:06AM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hallo,
>
> I have a Sparc 10 with Linux6.1 running I have two disks of 1Gb and
> 1.7Gb.
> I would like to do a linear raid but when I do "raidstart -a /dev/md0
> into shell I receive -> /dev/md0: Invalid argument <-
> and in
On Mon, Nov 01, 1999 at 01:39:14PM +0800, Next Liu wrote:
> Dear Sir:
>
> This Email come from Taiwan. We have used the Mandrake 6.1 OS to
> install
> software-RAID. As before, we used three 8.4G HD as RAID-0 was OK. But
> now
> we supportted larger HD - 13.0G x 3 as RAID-0. While we use "mkr
On Sun, 31 Oct 1999, John Finlay wrote:
> Encouraged by this result, I foolishly went ahead and remade a linear
Not blatantly foolish at all - fs corruption has been a tricky problem
with 2.2.
> /dev/md1 using the two 36GB drives (except for 2GB in /dev/hda1 for /) -
> 32GB in /dev/hda4 and 34G
Thanks to James suggestion, I reviewed the messages file and found that
md.c was complaining that there was no chunk size (seems like a bug
since linear layouts shouldn't require this parameter). When I added
"chunk-size 4" to /etc/raidtab for /dev/md1, I was able to get a linear
/dev/md1 working.
[ Saturday, October 30, 1999 ] John Finlay wrote:
> raiddev /dev/md1
> raid-level linear
> nr-raid-disks 2
> persistent-superblock 0
> device /dev/hdb1
> raid-disk 0
> device /dev/hdb2
> raid-disk 1
Only thing I could think of is use /dev/md0 instead of md1 (u
> I have a Sparc 10 with Linux6.0 running. I have four disks da 1.7Gb.
Linux 6.0 did i miss something, last time i checked it was
around 2.3.20 and that wasn't 10 years ago.
> My kernel is 2.2.5-15 and raidtools-0.90
>
> If I do mkraid /dev/md0 I receive -> handling MD device /dev/md0
>
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Stephen Waters wrote:
> Francisco Jose Montilla wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > > Here is the output of df -k:
> > > Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
> > > /dev/md0 5916736
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
>>> I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my
>>> budget. Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes
>>> killed it for me.
> > What do you mean by append? As I said on a post recently, I've
>
>
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
Hi,
[...]
> > I'd check the jumpers to see if the unit allows hardware
> > compression to be set by software. Check either hp.com for this or the
> > unit documentation. Once you're sure that the unit allows it, use mt-dds
> > to set it. I fo
Bru / bru 2000 is a fine product that I may eventually buy. But it is not
the same catagory as arkeia/amanda.
Bru,afio,cpio,dump,tar are the "get data off filesystem into a stream"
catagory.
arkeia/amanda are at the "manage a bunch of streams from different systems
onto a tape server, catalog th
> > I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my budget.
> > Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes killed it for me.
>
> What do you mean by append? As I said on a post recently, I've
Can tonights nightly incremental backup be appended to the end of
> > Here is the output of df -k:
> > Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
> > /dev/md0 5916736 811879 4798422 14% /
> > /dev/md1 3106031 41673 2903712 1% /var
> > /dev/sda183561123 11922926 67127549 15% /dat
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Now that someone has started this thread :)
>
> Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
> there?
>
> I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my budget.
> Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to ta
Francisco Jose Montilla wrote:
>
> On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> > Here is the output of df -k:
> > Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
> > /dev/md0 5916736 811879 4798422 14% /
> > /dev/md1 3106031
>Now that someone has started this thread :)
>
>Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
>there?
>
>Anything else in that catagory? Commercial, open, whatever.
>
We use BackupEdge from www.microlite.com . It's nicest feature is not yet
supported in LINUX softw
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Brian D. Haymore wrote:
> bru2000 is another. Not sure on the URL though.
The URL is http://www.estinc.com/.
I use an older version of their "Personal Edition" (bundled with Official
Red Hat 5.1) with an Exabyte EXB-8700 8mm drive, and have never had a
problem. BRU c
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
Hi,
> Here is the output of df -k:
> Filesystem 1024-blocks Used Available Capacity Mounted on
> /dev/md0 5916736 811879 4798422 14% /
> /dev/md1 3106031 41673 2903712 1% /var
> /dev/sda1
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
> Now that someone has started this thread :)
>
> Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
> there?
Do you mean "industrial strenght" or "industrial GUI"? :)
> I got my quote for arkeia
> > I'm sorry this is a bit off-topic, but large raid sets need big backups ;-)
> > My HP SureStore DAT24 stops after writing 12 GB of data to a DDS-3 tape. I
> > suspect there must be something wrong with the compression. To verify this I
> > need some additional information:
>
> How are you d
bru2000 is another. Not sure on the URL though.
--
Brian D. Haymore
University of Utah
Center for High Performance Computing
155 South 1452 East RM 405
Salt Lake City, Ut 84112-0190
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Phone: (801) 585-1755 - Fax: (801) 585-5366
On Fri, 22 Oct 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wro
> Now that someone has started this thread :)
good call.
> Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
> there?
not for under 7 grand :)
I've never used BRE but I've heard its not bad. What about lone-tar?
> I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No wa
Now that someone has started this thread :)
Are there any other "industrial strength" backup solutions like arkeia out
there?
I got my quote for arkeia today, and it was 7 grand. No way on my budget.
Amanda looks good, but not being able to append to tapes killed it for me.
Anything else in tha
On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Brian D. Haymore wrote:
Hi,
> > I'm sorry this is a bit off-topic, but large raid sets need big backups ;-)
Hehe, i'll take the oportunity also to ask a couple things ;)
> > My HP SureStore DAT24 stops after writing 12 GB of data to a DDS-3 tape. I
> > sus
Kelly French <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> For me, I'm just tarring up hosts to tape. When the tape develops an
> error, and I use software compression (i.e. -zvvcf /dev/nst0), then I'll
> lose the whole session. If I let the tape drive compress, it won't
> compress as good (like you said), but
.
"I program my homecomputer; beam myself into
the future." --Kraftwerk, 1981
> --
> From: Kelly French[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 21, 1999 2:32 PM
> To: Stephen Waters
> Cc: Thomas Seidel; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> S
David Cooley wrote:
>
> At 12:33 PM 10/21/1999 -0500, Stephen Waters wrote:
> >i've found that software compression (with our cheesy seagate backup
> >exec s/w anyway..) compresses better than hardware because it is able to
> >reorganize the data in a more compressible manner rather than the driv
For me, I'm just tarring up hosts to tape. When the tape develops an
error, and I use software compression (i.e. -zvvcf /dev/nst0), then I'll
lose the whole session. If I let the tape drive compress, it won't
compress as good (like you said), but at least I only lose a file or two.
-kf
At 12:33 PM 10/21/1999 -0500, Stephen Waters wrote:
>i've found that software compression (with our cheesy seagate backup
>exec s/w anyway..) compresses better than hardware because it is able to
>reorganize the data in a more compressible manner rather than the drive
>just compressing whatever hi
i've found that software compression (with our cheesy seagate backup
exec s/w anyway..) compresses better than hardware because it is able to
reorganize the data in a more compressible manner rather than the drive
just compressing whatever hits the buffer.
we average just under 18GB per tape w/ fu
On Thu, 21 Oct 1999, Thomas Seidel wrote:
> I'm sorry this is a bit off-topic, but large raid sets need big backups ;-)
> My HP SureStore DAT24 stops after writing 12 GB of data to a DDS-3 tape. I
> suspect there must be something wrong with the compression. To verify this I
> need some additio
You probably need to get a fresh version of raidtools.
root wrote:
> Hello Everyone,
>
> I was wondering if someone could help me trouble shoot the following
> problems I am currently having in creating a RAID1 array.
>
> First, I've configured, compiled and correctly installed linux-2.2.12
> w
Warning
Could not process message with given Content-Type:
multipart/signed; boundary=cxfMsoqvp1jUizWj; micalg=pgp-md5;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Warning
Could not process message with given Content-Type:
multipart/signed; boundary=PZYVFYZbFYjzBslI; micalg=pgp-md5;protocol="application/pgp-signature"
rom the fact I currently worry about overwhelming my
PCI bus...)
> -Original Message-
> From: Osma Ahvenlampi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 1999 7:14 AM
> To: Bruno Prior
> Cc: Linux-Raid; Dietmar Stein; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Jason Speckman
> Subject:
"Bruno Prior" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The fact that the linux source includes legacy raid code which is incompatible with
> the latest raidtools seems to cause a lot of misunderstandings. Can't the legacy
> stuff be taken out and turned into a patch for those who like the older tools?
I und
Jason Speckman wrote:
> I have kernel 2.2.5 with raid 1 compiled in, raidtools 0.90. I
and Paul Witting wrote:
> both Dell 2300's with RedHat 5.2 installed. I have upgraded the kernel of
> this machine to 2.2.5, including RAID 0 and RAID1 support in that kernel. I
Sounds like both these guys we
Hi!
On Tue, 20 Apr 1999, Jason Speckman wrote:
> I have kernel 2.2.5 with raid 1 compiled in, raidtools 0.90. I
> want to mirror my /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2 partitions. I already have
> (problems.) [...]
Have you patched the kernel? A patch is needed for raidtools. Check the
FAQ and HOWTO
Do a mkraid --really-force /dev/md0
Greetings, Dietmar
Jason Speckman wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I have kernel 2.2.5 with raid 1 compiled in, raidtools 0.90. I want to mirror
>my /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2 partitions. I already have data on /dev/sda2 and have
>backed it up. When I do a mkraid -
On Mon, 19 Apr 1999, Abed M. Hammoud wrote:
Hi,
> I am trying to get raid level one working on my machine. I have
> installed
>
> raidtools-0.50beta10-2
>
> and I have enabled the raid as a module in my kernel.
>
> The output of the df command is:
>
> /dev/hda1 54410 2
hi abed
your are showing that sda5 and sdb5 is used as /local and /loca1
you cannot use those partitions in another raid partition ( /dev/md0 )
( take sda5 and sdb5 out of your /etc/fstab file )
in /etc/raid1.conf, you need to select partitions that are NOT used
anywhere else
if yo
Chris Chabot wrote:
> Help! im lost, finaly have found the new howto on ftp.fi.kernel.org after days
> of dispair and old documentation... tried the new tools ... nada ... tried
> kernel patches ... busted kernel 2.2.5 ...
>
> My problem is this ... i created the /etc/raidtools (modified example
Try mkraid --really-force /dev/md0
Im sure it will work.
Greetings, Dietmar
>- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -
>Absender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Betreff: help!
>Empfänger: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Datum: 09. Apr 1999 05:41
>
> Help! im lost, finaly have found the new howto on ftp.fi.kernel.org after da
> /sbin/mdadd -a
> Warning : no checksum field for /dev/md0
> /dev/md0: No such file or directory
>
> ./MAKEDEV: don't know how to make device "md0"
>
> Help!
You are using a very old version of the raidtools if you are using mdadd (get the
latest raid0145 patch and raidtools package from
ftp.ker
On Sat, 9 Jan 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > i was trying to apply raid0145-19981215 to 2.2.0pre4
> >
> I did the same to Pre5, same problem.
fetch the pre5 patch from
http://www..kernel.org/pub/linux/daemons/raid/alpha
-- mingo
If I'm not mistaken, the 2.0.36 that came with RedHat 5.2 was the prepatch
version, not the final release.
If that's the case, you'll need to make the modules from the 2.0.36 final
kernel that you've got. "make modules" and "make modules_install" should
do it..
Brian
On Wed, 16 Dec 1998, Enbo
Raid is not (yet?) safe as a module. Build it inside the kernel.
> I am using RedHat 5.2 (raid supported) and am having a hell of a time
> getting a root partition to boot as raid 1.
.
> I am simply trying to set up mirroring on my root partition for High
> Availability (as well as fault tolerance). I don't want my system to
> lock if any one of the drives
i previously posted this. i reccommend you look through the raid
archives at
http://www.linuxhq.com/lnxlists/
and you will find most of what you need. please note: the raid tools i
list and patches i list below have since been updated also,
if you are using 5.2 you will find that redhat has
On Mon, 7 Dec 1998, Marc A. Mnich wrote:
> I am using RedHat 5.2 (raid supported) and am having a hell of a time =
> getting a root partition to boot as raid 1.
>
> Does anyone have Linux working in a root mounted RAID configuration? =20
> What do the linuxrc and lilo.conf files need to look lik
On Thu, Nov 12, 1998 at 07:14:57PM +0800, Enbo Zhang wrote:
> I use two SCSI partition(each 258M) as a raid1 device md1, and mount as /var
> on my RH5.2 box.
get a fresh kernel, the latest raid patches from ftp.kernel.org
and the latest raid tools also.
set all raid partitions to type 0xfd
and
On Tue, 10 Nov 1998, Godfrey Nix wrote:
> Sorry if this is a FAQ, but I cannot find anywhere the
> notes on how to apply the raid patch to my kernel src
> files.
line 229 in raidtools/README.
> I am running RedHat version 5.1 (kernel 2.0.35)
> and have pulled down the patch file
> raid145-0.36
| I am running RedHat version 5.1 (kernel 2.0.35)
| and have pulled down the patch file
| raid145-0.36.3-2.0.30.gz
make sure you have the 'kernel-source' RPM installed (or just go grab the
source from ftp.kernel.org or a mirror). if you grab the source, untar it in
a directory (this is typical
96 matches
Mail list logo
