> I'm running RH 6.1 and a 2.2.14 kernel from SCSI drives. Then I have
Have U pached this kernel for the `new' md driver,
wich will work with raidtools v0.9
> 4x 60GB IDE disks which I want to format as a RAID0 array.
Why? I can't see the point in making 1 240Gb filesyste
I'm running RH 6.1 and a 2.2.14 kernel from SCSI drives. Then I have
4x 60GB IDE disks which I want to format as a RAID0 array.
I performed the following steps:
1. created a 0xfd ID partition 1 on every drive
/dev/hda /dev/hdb /dev/hdc /dev/hdd:
Disk /dev/hda: 255 heads, 63 sectors,
hello,
could anybody tell me which of these is quicker (in performance)
sorry if this is a FAQ
until next mail B-), l8r
Peter
--
:~~ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~:
: student of technical computer science :
: university of applied scie
On Sat, 15 Jul 2000, Chris Mauritz wrote:
> > From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 15 19:29:44 2000
> >
> > Edward Schernau wrote:
> >
> > > Wow, an email CCed to Linus himself! *faint*
> >
> > Well do you know of another way to get a patch into the kernel ??
>
> So if Linus gets hit by a bus (or
> So if Linus gets hit by a bus (or a fast moving hari krishna), how
> are folks to get things into the kernel then?
Probably Alan.
-sv
> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sat Jul 15 19:29:44 2000
>
> Edward Schernau wrote:
>
> > Wow, an email CCed to Linus himself! *faint*
>
> Well do you know of another way to get a patch into the kernel ??
So if Linus gets hit by a bus (or a fast moving hari krishna), how
are folks to get things into
Edward Schernau wrote:
> Wow, an email CCed to Linus himself! *faint*
Well do you know of another way to get a patch into the kernel ??
Wow, an email CCed to Linus himself! *faint*
Anders Qvist wrote:
> I have a 2.2.11+intl+raid0.90 successfully mounting its ext2 root file
> system off /dev/md0, which is autodetected by the kernel. A 2.4-test2
> kernel compiled with CONFIG_AUTODETECT_RAID fails to autodetect my
> partitons when I write it to a floppy and boot it. It just sa
r data-disk: 128k
Jul 3 17:22:33 vanity kernel: raid0: looking at sda5
Jul 3 17:22:33 vanity kernel: raid0: comparing sda5(1765760) with sda5(1765760)
Jul 3 17:22:33 vanity kernel: raid0: END
Jul 3 17:22:33 vanity kernel: raid0: ==> UNIQUE
Jul 3 17:22:33 vanity kernel: raid0: 1 zone
On Monday July 3, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a system with /boot on a normal partition and
> / being on md0 (raid0). It runs 2.2.14 or 2.2.16-RAID,
> however I need to switch to 2.3.99 for a variety of
> reasons. I've been trying to get it going to no
Hi all,
I have a system with /boot on a normal partition and
/ being on md0 (raid0). It runs 2.2.14 or 2.2.16-RAID,
however I need to switch to 2.3.99 for a variety of
reasons. I've been trying to get it going to no avail
for a couple of weeks now.
I have a few questions I'd like to g
n meet my needs.
FWIW, ReiserFS won't get you much unless there are large numbers of
files involved. I run s/w raid0 over h/w raid5 with ext2 specifically
because it's faster for my situation with relatively low file counts
(about 100 files per directory).
James
Hi James, thanks for the info.
>> I was wondering if there is a way to convert without reformatting?
James> Not currently, although it may be worth reconsidering a
James> conversion from 5 -> 0 if you can alleviate your performance
James> problems with other methods (chunk size, -R stride=, reis
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> I find that my RAID5 array is just too slow for my DB application. I
> have a large number of DB files on this array. I would like to
> convert to RAID0, and I can back up my files, but I was wondering if
> there is a way to convert without reformatting?
N
I find that my RAID5 array is just too slow for my DB application. I
have a large number of DB files on this array. I would like to
convert to RAID0, and I can back up my files, but I was wondering if
there is a way to convert without reformatting?
Dave
> -Original Message-
> From: Hugh Bragg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, June 23, 2000 12:36 AM
> To: Gregory Leblanc
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks, raid1 (was raid0) performance
>
[snip]
> > > What version of raidtools shoul
Gregory Leblanc wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Hugh Bragg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 5:04 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Benchmarks, raid1 (was raid0) performance
> >
> > Patch h
Carlos,
On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Carlos Carvalho wrote:
> I've been using raid5 with auto-detection for over a year without
> problems. Everything including the root fs is on raid5, the machine
> boots from floppy.
>
> I now want to rearrange the disks in raid0 arrays, and mak
> -Original Message-
> From: Carlos Carvalho [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 2:19 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: autostart with raid5 over raid0?
>
> Hi all,
>
> I've been using raid5 with auto-detection for over a yea
Hi all,
I've been using raid5 with auto-detection for over a year without
problems. Everything including the root fs is on raid5, the machine
boots from floppy.
I now want to rearrange the disks in raid0 arrays, and make a raid5 of
these. Will auto-detection/autostart work in this cas
: Look at the Bonnies seek performance. It should rise.
: For single sequential reads, readbalancer doesn't help.
: Bonnie tests only single sequential reads.
:
: If you wan't to test with multiple io threads, try
: http://tiobench.sourceforge.net
Great, thanks, I'll give this a try!
On Wed Jun 21 2000 at 12:46:02 -0500, Diegmueller, Jason (I.T. Dept) wrote:
> : > Can/Should I apply the raid1readbalance-2.2.15-B2 patch after
> : > applying mingo's raid-2.2.16-A0 patch?
> :
> : I don't see any reason not to apply it, although I haven't
> : tried it with 2.2.16.
>
> I have be
: None offhand, but can you post your test configuration/parameters?
: Things like test size, relavent portions of /etc/raidtab, things
: like that. I know this should be a whole big list, but I can think
: of all of them right now. FYI, I don't do IDE RAID (or IDE at all),
: but it's pretty aw
> -Original Message-
> From: Diegmueller, Jason (I.T. Dept) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 10:46 AM
> To: 'Gregory Leblanc'; 'Hugh Bragg'; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Benchmarks, raid1 (was raid0) performa
: > Can/Should I apply the raid1readbalance-2.2.15-B2 patch after
: > applying mingo's raid-2.2.16-A0 patch?
:
: I don't see any reason not to apply it, although I haven't
: tried it with 2.2.16.
I have been out of the linux-raid world for a bit, but a
two-drive RAID1 installation yesterday ha
> -Original Message-
> From: Hugh Bragg [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2000 5:04 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks, raid1 (was raid0) performance
>
> Patch http://www.icon.fi/~mak/raid1/raid1readbalance-2.2.15-B2
> i
Patch http://www.icon.fi/~mak/raid1/raid1readbalance-2.2.15-B2
improves read performance right? At what cost?
Can/Should I apply the raid1readbalance-2.2.15-B2 patch after
applying mingo's raid-2.2.16-A0 patch?
What version of raidtools should I use against a stock 2.2.16
system with raid-2.2.16
Is Lilo incompatible with HPT368 @
RAID0?
-Rolf
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 1:26 PM
> To: Gregory Leblanc
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks, raid1 (was raid0) performance
>
> Gregory Leblanc wrote:
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Jeff Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 3:56 PM
> To: Gregory Leblanc
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks, raid1 (was raid0) performance
>
> Gregory Leblanc wrote:
> &
Gregory Leblanc wrote:
>
> I don't have anything that caliber to compare against, so I can't really
> say. Should I assume that you don't have Mika's RAID1 read balancing patch?
I have to admit I was ignorant of the patch (I had skimmed the archives,
but not well enough). Searched the archive f
Bug1: Maybe im missing something here, why arent reads just as fast as writes?
The cynic in me suggests that the RAID driver has to wait for the
information to be read off the disks, but it doesn't have to wait for the
writes to complete before returning, but I haven't read the code.
-HJC
On Tue, Jun 13, 2000 at 04:51:46AM +1000, bug1 wrote:
> Maybe im missing something here, why arent reads just as fast as writes?
I note the same on a 2 way IDE RAID-1 device, with both disks on a separate
bus.
Regards,
bert hubert
--
| http://www.rent-a-ne
Gregory Leblanc wrote:
>>--snip--<<
> > I conclude that on my system there is an ide saturation point (or
> > bottleneck) around 40MB/s
> Didn't the LAND5 people think that there was a bottleneck around 40MB/Sec at
> some point? Anybody know if they were talking about IDE drives? Seems
> quite
> -Original Message-
> From: bug1 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2000 10:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Benchmarks, raid0 performance, 1,2,3,4 drives
>
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > could
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Hello,
Just to let you know, I also see very similar IDE-RAID0 performance
problems:
I have RAID0 with two 30G DiamondMax (Maxtor) ATA-66 drives connected to
a Promise Ultra66 controller.
I am using kernel 2.4.0-test1
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> could you send me your /etc/raidtab? I've tested the performance of 4-disk
> RAID0 on SCSI, and it scales perfectly here, as far as hdparm -t goes.
> (could you also send the 'hdparm -t /dev/md0' results, do you see a
> degradation in those n
Adrian Head wrote:
>
> I have seen people complain about simular issues on the kernel mailing
> list so maybe there is an actual kernel problem.
>
> What I have always wanted to know but haven't tested yet is to test raid
> performance with and without the noatime attribute in /etc/fstab I
> th
Head
> -Original Message-
> From: bug1 [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 June 2000 04:52
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: Ingo Molnar
> Subject: Benchmarks, raid0 performance, 1,2,3,4 drives
>
> Here are some more benchmarks for raid0 with different numbers
Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> could you send me your /etc/raidtab? I've tested the performance of 4-disk
> RAID0 on SCSI, and it scales perfectly here, as far as hdparm -t goes.
> (could you also send the 'hdparm -t /dev/md0' results, do you see a
> degradation in those n
> -Original Message-
> From: Jordan Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 12:16 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RAID0 problems
>
> I have a few problems regarding my software RAID0 solution.
> I have two
> disks, hd
have a few problems regarding my software RAID0 solution. I have two
> disks, hdb and hdd, on a raid0 array. Everything was working fine until I
> upgraded my kernel (from 2.2.12 to 2.2.16). Yes, support for RAID is
> compiled in the kernel. On bootup, I get :
>
> EXT2-fs warning: mou
could you send me your /etc/raidtab? I've tested the performance of 4-disk
RAID0 on SCSI, and it scales perfectly here, as far as hdparm -t goes.
(could you also send the 'hdparm -t /dev/md0' results, do you see a
degradation in those numbers as well?)
it could either be some s
I have a few problems regarding my software RAID0 solution. I have two
disks, hdb and hdd, on a raid0 array. Everything was working fine until I
upgraded my kernel (from 2.2.12 to 2.2.16). Yes, support for RAID is
compiled in the kernel. On bootup, I get :
EXT2-fs warning: mounting unchecked
Here are some more benchmarks for raid0 with different numbers of
elements, all tests done with tiobench.pl -s=800
Hardware: dual celeron 433, 128MB ram using 2.4.0-test1-ac15+B5 raid
patch, raid drives on two promise udma66 cards (one drive per channel)
Write speed looks decent for 1 and 2
raid1 and raid5 mainly.
I would love to track down bottlenecks and investigate kernel
limitations of software raid, i know that raid0 doesnt scale very well,
the more drives you add the less performance gain there is, im not sure
where to start looking to indentify why performance doesnt scale, any
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
t; > Could this be a zero-length partition?
>
> mdstat:
>
> Personalities : [raid0]
> read_ahead 1024 sectors
> md0 : active raid0 hdc1[1] hda3[0] 1606272 blocks 64k chunks
> unused devices:
No active /dev/md1, so e2fsck failing is normal.
> hda: ST36531A, 6204MB w/128kB
[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
Hi. I'm in URGENT need of some help.
After changing motherboards in one of my boxes to a Via VB601, I forgot to
disable the UDMA setting in the bios. This is needed because this mobo,
my Seagate 6.5Gb drives, and UDMA don't mix.
The result was the kernel segfaulted/panicked after fscking /dev
On Sat, 20 May 2000, Harry Zink wrote:
> on 5/20/00 9:11 AM, Robert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I am probably doing something silly, put when applying the patch, lots
> > of the hunks seem to get rejected. Any ideas?
>
> Did you:
>
> patch -p0
> ??
>
> Did you apply them to a new, dow
on 5/20/00 9:11 AM, Robert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am probably doing something silly, put when applying the patch, lots
> of the hunks seem to get rejected. Any ideas?
Did you:
patch -p0
> On Tue, 16 May 2000, Harry Zink wrote:
> > You can get the patches at:
> >
> > http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/
> >
> > Apply them, re-compile your kernel, and this should work.
> >
> > Harry
> >
Is there any other place to get these patches? Neither the one for 2.2.14
nor the o
On Tue, 16 May 2000, Harry Zink wrote:
> You can get the patches at:
>
> http://people.redhat.com/mingo/raid-patches/
>
> Apply them, re-compile your kernel, and this should work.
>
> Harry
>
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.2/linux-2.2.1503-Mat-2000 17:22
does not seem
Hi,
and thanks a lot to all that replied so fast. I got it up
running now with a patched kernel.
What I do not understand is that much output from mkraid
that I have already posted in my first email. Do I have
to worry about it, because it came again this time ?
Greetings,
Timo
on 5/16/00 5:43 AM, Timo Veith at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Then after a reboot with my newer kernel, the raid0 was gone. I tried
> to do a mkraid again, but the results were the same as before.
Uhm... did you maybe not patch your kernel source with the RAID 0.90 patches
before compiling
Hi all,
I am new to the use of raidtools. I want to set up a raid0 drive
with a scsi disk and an ide disk. I am using redhat-6.2, and I have
the latest kernel version 2.2.15 running, which I downloaded after
the normal installation. I needed it because I had trouble with the
tulip.o module in
how do you expect to boot raid0? think about that...
better do raid 1 or regular disk for the partition where your kernel lives, so
your boot loader can find your kernel, rather than have to find pieces of your
kernel spead across multiple disks...
i have found raid in 2.3.xx to so far be a
Can you make a boot floppy and use that? That's what I do. If you
create a normal partion on one of your drives for /boot, then you
really haven't gained much by using a fault-tolerant raid (I realize
you are using raid-0, not 3,5,etc. I'm speaking generally). I.e., if
the drive fails with the
Is it possible to boot from a raid 0 array using linux 2.3.99-pre3?
I followed the Software-Raid-HOWTO and the array works o.k. until I
try to boot from it.
I created a seperate /boot non-raid. I update the /etc/lilo.conf per
the instructions to point the root file system to the raid device.
A
Hi,
I have just finished to test raid0/raid1/raid5 on the same system
(3x20Go ibm 7200). raid0/1/5 is done on 3 hd.
kernel 2.2.12 + module from promise ultra66.o
please tell me if it seems to be okey.
AMD300/128/1x20Go + 2promise 66 + 3x20Go
raid0
Dir Size BlkSz Thr# Read (CPU
Hi all
I got the raid working now .
But how do I get it to start after rebooting.
I do the following .
raidstart /dev/md0
mount /dev/md0 /storage
Do I need to change the init scripts for this ...
Is it safe to reboot while this is running ?
I have read the software howto. It ment
I wanted to follow-up that with kernel 2.3.51 I get raid0
performance problems similar to those reported below, but at larger file
sizes.
I created files of approx. size 256 MB, 512 MB, and 1 GB. I did simple
tests 'time cat file ... > /dev/null' on different file sizes/c
When running Bonnie, you should always set the file size to 3-4
times the size of your RAM, else you get the 200Mb /sec speeds
(which are very pleasant, but not realistic). I think the 100% CPU is
in great part Bonnie generating the test files. I've tried copying files,
this takes almost no CP
th kernel 2.11 and the
raid-patches for that kernel. /proc/mdstat contains
Personalities : [raid0] [translucent]
read_ahead 1024 sectors
md0 : active raid0 sdc1[1] sdb1[0] 17847936 blocks 16k chunks
unused devices:
and our raidtab is
raiddev /dev/md0
raid-level
Jakob Østergaard wrote:
>
> Someone (Probably Andre Hedrick, or perhaps Andrea Arcangali -- sorry guys, I
> don't recall) explained this on LKML. Out of my memory it has something to do
> with ATA modes and the kernel configuration. You haven't enabled ``Generic
> busmaster support'', or perhaps
On Tue, 14 Mar 2000, Scott M. Ransom wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have just set up RAID0 with two 30G DiamondMax (Maxtor) ATA-66 drives
> connected to a Promise Ultra66 controller.
>
> I am using raid 0.90 in kernel 2.3.51 on a dual PII-450 with 256M RAM.
>
> Here are
not a
single hint in the logs for the freeze. Now I 'could' live with that but
two days later I got ext2fs errors on one of the raid0 partitions. Things
like the following:
Mar 15 01:29:46 kludge kernel: EXT2-fs warning (device md(9,3)):
ext2_unlink: Deleting nonexistent file (159), 0
Mar 15
> "Kent" == Kent Nilsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kent> I've got exactly the same problem on a Mylex hardware RAID-
Kent> controller, writing is nearly twice as fast as reading. The
Kent> drives are Barracuda 50Gb drives, the controller is a
Kent> DAC1164P. I use the latest firmware, and la
Hello,
I have just set up RAID0 with two 30G DiamondMax (Maxtor) ATA-66 drives
connected to a Promise Ultra66 controller.
I am using raid 0.90 in kernel 2.3.51 on a dual PII-450 with 256M RAM.
Here are the results from bonnie:
---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input
;
> I have just set up RAID0 with two 30G DiamondMax (Maxtor) ATA-66
> drives connected to a Promise Ultra66 controller.
>
> I am using raid 0.90 in kernel 2.3.51 on a dual PII-450 with 256M RAM.
>
> Here are the results from bonnie:
Kent Nilsen wrote:
>
> Do you by any chance have problems with the entire system
> freezing after a while or during lots of activity?
Only freezes I have seen seem to be coming from Netscape occasionally
hogging all available resources (I think).
But I will look more carefully in the future...
Hello,
I have just set up RAID0 with two 30G DiamondMax (Maxtor) ATA-66 drives
connected to a Promise Ultra66 controller.
I am using raid 0.90 in kernel 2.3.51 on a dual PII-450 with 256M RAM.
Here are the results from bonnie:
---Sequential Output ---Sequential Input
> It doesnt compile if you select it, but "boot with raid" works without
> enabling it anyway.
yeah? thanks for the info...
karl
[ Saturday, March 4, 2000 ] Martin Schulze wrote:
> I wonder why I can't get RAID0 aka striping work with 2.2.13. It only
> runs with 2.0.36.
old-style raid is no longer supported. You may wish to read the
s/w raid howto at http://ostenfeld.dk/~jakob/Software-RAID.HOWTO/
specif
I wonder why I can't get RAID0 aka striping work with 2.2.13. It only
runs with 2.0.36.
# mdadd -ar
/dev/sdc2: No such device
/dev/sdd2: No such device
/dev/sde2: No such device
/dev/md0: No such device
The appropriate SCSI driver is included, /dev/sda1 can be mounted without
a problem
It doesnt compile if you select it, but "boot with raid" works without
enabling it anyway.
> I also noticed that the "boot with raid" option in the kernel won't compile
> properly in the 2.3.4X series.
>
> thanks,
>
> karl
[ Friday, March 3, 2000 ] Karl Czajkowski wrote:
> > how much memory in the machine?
>
> 256 MB
> dual 550 MHz pentium III
>
> I did read other larger-than-memory files in between tests to try and
> avoid caching effects.
barely larger than memory doesn't count.
It's easily argued that 2x mem
a single disk.
how much memory in the machine?
> is there a known scheduling problem with the 2.3.4X kernel raid vs. the
> 2.2.12-20 patches distributed by redhat? I need the new kernel for
> ethernet patches...
2.3.4x raid merge isn't finished yet, but I'm surprised raid0 not
> how much memory in the machine?
256 MB
dual 550 MHz pentium III
I did read other larger-than-memory files in between tests to try and
avoid caching effects.
karl
I installed redhat 6.1 on a machine with two 50 GB disks, and created
a large raid0 scratch space across them. simple performance measurements,
consisting of "time cat file ... > /dev/null" showed great, near-perfect
performance scaling: 180 Mb/s for one disk and 350 Mb/s for two
[ Sunday, February 13, 2000 ] James Manning wrote:
> I'm going to try adding a --numruns flag for tiobench so we can have an
> automated facility for averaging over a number of runs. I believe the
> dip at 4 threads is real, but it's worth adding anyway :)
It'll be part of tiotest 0.23, but atta
[ Saturday, February 12, 2000 ] Peter Palfrader aka Weasel wrote:
> So, I finally found time to try the new RAID stuff and speed
> increased :)
Excellent.
> I also tried RAID1 with and without the read-balancing patch:
> The filesystem was always made with a simple "mke2fs ":
-Rstripe= could be
On Wed, Jan 12, 2000 at 02:43:29AM -0500 James Manning wrote:
> [ Tuesday, January 11, 2000 ] Peter Palfrader aka Weasel wrote:
> > I'm running a plain 2.2.14 but the results are no different than with
> > a 2.2.10 or 2.2.12.
[the results with raid0 were really poor (20m/s ove
[ Saturday, February 12, 2000 ] Eugene Blanchard wrote:
> I've put up an old article that I wrote for the Linux Gazette
http://www.cadvision.com/blanchas/raid.html
To be honest, while the "setting up raid10 with new tools" section could
be salvaged and donated to the current updated howto (inser
-- - -- --
> md120040961 10.3814 5.81% 9.43394 9.66% 133.826 1.20%
> md120040962 11.5381 7.73% 9.48548 9.34% 142.070 0.81%
> md120040964 12.8123 8.00% 9.55569 9.60% 151.459 0.68%
> md1200
At 00:32 12.02.00 -0800, smart wrote:
>For this application, space is more important that hard drive failures,
>so I've configured it as one large raid0 array, giving me a 160Gb.
>
>Here are the performance stats using hdparm (and I humbly admit that I don't
>even know
the raid working again.
The box boots and runs from a pair of SCSI drives so the IDE is totally
dedicated to the RAID.
For this application, space is more important that hard drive failures,
so I've configured it as one large raid0 array, giving me a 160Gb.
I'm about ready to start
Hi
I've put up an old article that I wrote for the Linux Gazette on my
website that discusses the old and new methods for running software
RAID0 and RAID1 on Linux. I believe that the methods discussed are very
similar to the latest software raidtools and the site would be very
useful for
On the same 3 SCSI disks, I can create a RAID0 set, and run
repeated bonnies on it.
On these disks, if I then make a RAID5 set, it starts making
the /dev/md0, and then dies, flooding my console with scsi
bus reset error messages. The higher the chunksize I use,
the later this happens, but I
Note the crosspost.
patching with the ALPHA kernel patch and recompiling gives much more
verbose, but equally unhelpful messages about WHY my RAID-0 array
fails.
I have raidtools-0.90, and the most recent RAID kernel patch.
Supposedly 2.2 was supposed to handle this but I guess that's a lie.
Do
OGIN(uid=0)
> [root@lx12pc164 /]# cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [2 raid0]
> read_ahead not set
> md0 : inactive
> md1 : inactive
> md2 : inactive
> md3 : inactive
> [root@lx12pc164 /]#
>
> Can anyone tell me what's the problem? thanks
Your FIRST problem is th
[ Wednesday, January 12, 2000 ] Andre Cruz wrote:
> mkraid: aborted, see the syslog and /proc/mdstat for potential clues.
Which kernel? which raid patch? which raidtools?
James
--
Miscellaneous Engineer --- IBM Netfinity Performance Development
localhost rc: Starting linuxconf succeeded
Jan 12 10:18:12 localhost PAM_pwdb[440]: (login) session opened for user
root by LOGIN(uid=0)
Jan 12 10:27:13 localhost PAM_pwdb[441]: (login) session opened for user
cruza by LOGIN(uid=0)
[root@lx12pc164 /]# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [2 raid0
On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, Steffen Ullrich wrote:
> Hi,
> The problem:
> using raid0 gives me a read/write performance of 20..23MByte/s, using
> raid1 (reading) gives only 9MByte/s (hdparm). Checking with dd to
> read/write a 200MByte file it shows that raid1 reading is only as
new Maxtor IDE with each 27GB/7200rpm, which give me about
19MByte/s each (hdparm3.6). **Each disk is as a master on a seperate
channel.** Only the IDE disks are used in the raid0/raid1 setup, nearly
no system acivity, and definitly nothing on the IDE disks which are
right now only used to get the
Drop the latest stuff from
ftp://ftp.*.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/hedrick/
and see if that helps.
On Tue, 14 Dec 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Tue, 14 Dec 1999, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
>
> > I just fixed this. it's due raid colliding with 2.2.14pre12.
> >
> > Apply this patch o
1 - 100 of 296 matches
Mail list logo
