On Thursday August 10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I'm using software raid and since a few developer kernel versions I have problems
>with the multiple device driver;
> now I describe the situation with the newest kernel test6 - messages I get from the
>kernel:
> 1) sizeof(mdp_super_t) = 4096
I'm using software raid and since a few developer kernel versions I have problems with
the multiple device driver;
now I describe the situation with the newest kernel test6 - messages I get from the
kernel:
1) sizeof(mdp_super_t) = 4096(I don't know wheter this belongs to md)
2) autodecting
I have a working RAID setup un 2.2.16, on a BP6 but using the ATA33
controller. I decided to try the HPT366.
My current kernel is the latest from RedHat (2.2.16-3).
I built a new one from the following applied in order:
- linux-2.2.16
- ide-2.2.16-2630
(http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel
OK, I realized that I did not give the full details of the kernel I was
running. I was running 2.2.14 + raid-patch. I got the crashes to stop
when I went back to the 2.2.14smp that came with RedHat 6.2.
I also backed all that data that was on the raid array and stopped the
array deleted the /dev
Ever since I've upgraded to RedHat 6.2
My raided scsi drive has had questionable integrity.
The drives were setup to store my extremlely busy
(read and writes) mysql database tables.
My main system is mounted on an IDE drive.
/dev/hda8 256194158197 84769 65% /
/dev/hda1
Well, after receiving numerous emails with suggestions and help, I've
finally got this raid thing setup
I just wanted to post and say thanks to all who helped.
allan
bruno
mike
surge
luca
gordon
and anyone else that helped that I might have forgotten. This has been a
really good experience and I
Does anyone know anything about Kernel 2.2's ability to watch for thread
deadlocks, and kill off the offending thread?
I remember reading a snipit somewhere that talked of this ability and
problems people had been seeing. I have been looking through linux
source for the code but have yet to find
an [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 17 September 1999 18:59
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Bruno Prior
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: root raid problems
>
>
> hello,
>
> i was probably unclear in my previous post. i had not been able to make
> any raid devices (/dev/m
Leandro et al,
THANKS!! normally i don't type in caps, but this was so amazingly helpful
that i can't help it.
i followed your instructions nearly step for step and i now have
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid5]
read_ahead 1024 sectors
md3 : active raid1 sda7[1] sdb7[0] 530048 blo
[oops, sent to vgers.rutgers.edu - resending..]
hello,
i was probably unclear in my previous post. i had not been able to make
any raid devices (/dev/md0 was not actually created).
i modified the raidtab as was suggested, removing the raid-disk 1 line and
just leaving the failed-disk 1 .
i
> the biggest problem, i think, is that i can't get the system to boot off a
> hard disk at all. during the (redhat 6.0) install i said to put lilo on
> the mbr (/dev/sda). this didn't really work - when i bring the machine
> up, it says something to the effect of "can't find operating system -
Hi All,
I have a Sun Ultra 2 running RedHat 6.0 with all the updates etc.
I have successfully been running RAID5 on it with the following:
Sun D1000 with 12 4.2G drives, seperated into 2 clusters of 6 each... this
is on a single SCSI interface.
I mount the 2 md devices and have no problems.
To
hello,
i'm trying to set up root raid on a new system. it's an adaptec aaa-131u2
(which linux doesn't like for hardware-based raid) with two 9gb disks.
the biggest problem, i think, is that i can't get the system to boot off a
hard disk at all. during the (redhat 6.0) install i said to put lil
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
On 9/6/99, 10:25:34 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote regarding Re: Raid
Problems:
> install the old raidtools (0.5)
>
install the old raidtools (0.5)
or use the newest (0.9) with the 0.9 kernel patches
On Mon, 6 Sep 1999, Matthew wrote:
> I am running Mandrake 6.0, I installed the raid tools, and loaded the
> raid1 module using insmod raid1. When I issue an lsmod raid1 is
> listed.
>
> When I cat the /proc/
Matthew wrote:
>
> I am running Mandrake 6.0, I installed the raid tools, and loaded the
> raid1 module using insmod raid1. When I issue an lsmod raid1 is
> listed.
>
> When I cat the /proc/mdstat file it says:
> Personalities : [3 raid1]
> read_ahead not set
> md0 : inactive
> md1 : inactive
; Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
> Subject: Re: Raid Problems
>
>
> Make sure you don't have any of these drives/partitions mounted, try
> mkraid -f /dev/md0, to force the creation of the devices.
>
> I had the same problem, and had to use more fo
Make sure you don't have any of these drives/partitions mounted, try
mkraid -f /dev/md0, to force the creation of the devices.
I had the same problem, and had to use more forceful measures to create
the array.
Marco
> handling MD device /dev/md0
> analyzing super-block
> disk0: /dev/sdb1, 444
I am running Mandrake 6.0, I installed the raid tools, and loaded the
raid1 module using insmod raid1. When I issue an lsmod raid1 is
listed.
When I cat the /proc/mdstat file it says:
Personalities : [3 raid1]
read_ahead not set
md0 : inactive
md1 : inactive
md2 : inactive
md3 : inactive
I cre
I have taken a system with raid setup and
working on a RH 5.2 system and tried to upgrade to RH 6.0. This seems to
be causing major problems. If I use the new mkraid --upgrade /dev/md0
command I get the following error:
mkraid --upgrade /dev/md1handling MD device
/dev/md1analyzing super
hello
after a reboot (caused by a power fail) my raid was checked with ckraid and
brought back into sync, but e2fsck sais, that the md-device-partition has
zero length??
the problem is, that my /usr /home and /var on the md-device resist
i used the md-tools from debian 2.0 (with a self build 2.
Hello, I've got an external hardware RAID connected via SCSI to my Linux box
(Mandrake 6.0). Linux sees it, and lets me partition and format it. The problems
start when I reboot, it complains that something is wrong with the superblock
on /dev/sda (the raid), try e2fsck -b 8193. I do, and it st
[posted&mailed]
Nick Vermeer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have linux-2.2.6 + raid-0145-2.2.6 patches running on an SMP Dual PIII-500 w/
> 512MB ram
>
> 2 Adaptec 2940U2W's w/ IBM 9.1 Gig 10,000RPM LVD drives
>
> Current config
>
> SCSI IDControler Card
> 0
used by devices to report
serious errors to initiator and should not make problems. The behaviour of
the driver seems not normal to me.
Gérard.
On Wed, 26 May 1999, Nick Vermeer* wrote:
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Raid problems
>
> I have linux-2.2.6 + raid-0145-2.2.6 patche
I'm no expert, but here's a suggestion, in your kernel compile don't allow
multiple luns, and in your scsi card configs, turn 'allow disconnect' off on
those drives.
Russell
On 26-May-99 Nick Vermeer* wrote:
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Raid problems
>
I've moved the PCI cards, and the cables are well withen spec (Max length is 12m
on LVD) I have literally changed out all the hardware and the problem reoccurs,
yet another chain in the same box with the same equipment works perfectly.
I'm pondering trying 2.2.7 to see if that has any bearing.
> May 22 00:45:10 shamu kernel: (scsi1:0:1:-1) Unexpected busfree, LASTPHASE =0x40,
>SEQADDR = 0x15d
> May 22 00:45:10 shamu kernel: (scsi1:0:1:0) No active SCB for reconnecting target -
>Issuing BUS DEVICE RESET.
> May 22 00:45:10 shamu kernel: (scsi1:0:1:0) SAVED_TCL=0x10, ARG_1=0xff,
I have linux-2.2.6 + raid-0145-2.2.6 patches running on an SMP Dual PIII-500 w/
512MB ram
2 Adaptec 2940U2W's w/ IBM 9.1 Gig 10,000RPM LVD drives
Current config
SCSI IDControler Card
0 scsi1
0 scsi0
1 scsi1
2
It's not my machine, so no... sorry not yet... but I can say that
downgrading to 2.2.7 works for me
I will be looking at this again at some stage but I'm no C programmer
James
On Tue, 25 May 1999, Shaun Sharples wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I seem to be having exactly the same problem.. CPU ti
Hi all,
I "played" a litte with raid today and experienced some problems:
I have a generally stable system running RH 5.2, 2.2.9, raid-2.2.6 and
NFS-2.2.9-patch; 2xPII-350, 256MB; 4 Raid devices: mirror for root,
3xraid5 (1.5,2 and 55GB).
Then I did some things to it like rebooting it the hard
Hi
I followed the discussion and wanted something to say about the
"changed" topic,
which is now more "learning in a real enviroment or not".
First time I started with linux on my machine at home, I thought like
"hm, linux is
much better than windows as I was told so I can sweep away my windows
[ I've delayed reply to this one to try to work out how to express myself
better, but have failed, so sorry -- it's not as clear as I'd hoped
]
>> o Learning
>> Granted, no speed improvements, but you can learn about it.
>> Knowledge like that comes in handy in Interviews ;-)
> But y
I would like to thank everyone for helping me solve my RAID problems.
With the kernel patch everything seems to work ok now. I see great
increases in speed over the raid-0.50 I was running before. I was
attempting to use a single disk as a raid because I was testing it before
i put it on a
Ok,
thanks for the answer; I didn't get in this conflict, but I wondered,
because it seemed that the raidtools are able to recognize the devices
on which raid is built and check if there are multiple devices instead
of only one.
For testing and some other things it may be a good idea to set up ra
Thanks for the many responses, everyone. Just so you know, the reason
I am creating a raid on a single disk is because I am testing the
raidtools before I put it on some larger file servers. I have run
into a new problem now. When I run raidstart I get an error. I first
created /etc/raidtab
I have done a similar setup on 2.0.36 (same version of raidtools &
patches, Redhat), three partitions on the same physical disk, in order
to get the hang of 0.90 before putting it on my production server. I
assume that's what you're (he's) doing.
It works with a bunch of partitions on t
Well, I didn't get a reject updating from 2.2.8 to 2.2.9, but looking, I
have manually merged this file before Also, I didn't test the patches
with 2.2.8, although 2.2.7 worked fine.
On Sun, 16 May 1999, Paul Jakma wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 1999, A James Lewis wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'
On Sat, 15 May 1999, Bill Anderson wrote:
> Chris Price wrote:
> >
> > Robert, why are you running raid on 1 disk???
> >
> > What benefit do you expect to derive from running raid on a single
> > disk?
> >
> > Unless you have a special application, there is **NO**
On Sat, 15 May 1999, A James Lewis wrote:
Hi,
I've patched my kernel to 2.2.9 (After applying the 19990421-2.2.6 (To
2.2.6)...
It worked until 2.2.9, then it appears to work but an array will
never sync under 2.2.9... it just gradually increases the estimated time
to completio
Hi
Will the raidtools recognize that there is only one device?
I think, he wants to set up raid only on one disk for testing.
Greetings, Dietmar
m. allan noah wrote:
>
> you dont want to do this. the raid code wont let you IIRC.
> raid is for spreading your data across multiple drives, for da
> mkraid: aborted
As I have pointed out several times on this list, the above message actually
means "Please see /var/log/messages for details".
As others have pointed out, having multiple RAID0 partitions on the same disk
isn't a good idea (at least, not with single head-per-surface disks), a
Chris Price wrote:
>
> Robert, why are you running raid on 1 disk???
>
> What benefit do you expect to derive from running raid on a single
> disk?
>
> Unless you have a special application, there is **NO** point to
> creating a raid array from one disk.
>
>
On Fri, 14 May 1999, Robert (Drew) Norman wrote:
> I have a IBM 9GB drive split into 3 partitions of equal size.
>
> raiddev /dev/md0
> raid-level0
> nr-raid-disks 3
> nr-spare-disks0
> chunk-size16
>
> device
Hi,
I've patched my kernel to 2.2.9 (After applying the 19990421-2.2.6 (To
2.2.6)...
It worked until 2.2.9, then it appears to work but an array will
never sync under 2.2.9... it just gradually increases the estimated time
to completion forever
Any ideas? I know there was some buffer chan
Hi
Most of the problems with raidtools 0.90 belong to a missing kernel
patch, a missing "--really-force"-option to mkraid and a missing
recompilation of the kernel and last a reboot to activte the new
raidtools.
Are you sure that you have done all those things before?
Greetings, Dietmar
Robert
Robert, why are you running raid on 1 disk???
What benefit do you expect to derive from running raid on a single
disk?
Unless you have a special application, there is **NO** point to
creating a raid array from one disk.
Chris
On Fri, 14 May 1999, Robert (
On Fri, 14 May 1999, Robert (Drew) Norman wrote:
> I can not get raidtools-0.90 to work. I have attempted everything I know
> to do. I have used the raidtools-0.50 before with no problems. I am
> running the following:
have you patched the 2.2.8 kernel with the latest RAID driver patch? You
I can not get raidtools-0.90 to work. I have attempted everything I know
to do. I have used the raidtools-0.50 before with no problems. I am
running the following:
Redhat Linux 6.0 with 2.2.8 recompiled kernel.
448MB RAM
raidtools-0.90
I have a IBM 9GB drive split into 3 partitions of equal s
Hi,
I'm attempting to make a RAID 5 on an Apple Network server 700. This
machine has three SCSI busses (one external and two internal). The two
internal are run by a NCR53C825a chip for each bus. There is a hot
swappable backplane that these two busses are split across and I have 7 4
Gb Seagat
On Thu, Jan 07, 1999 at 12:06:34PM -0200, Carlos Carvalho mentioned:
> John P . Looney ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote on 6 January 1999 13:41:
> >minbar# raidstart --configfile /etc/raid1.conf /dev/md01.conf /dev/md0
>
> Hm... You should list the real partitions to raidstart I think...
>
> # raidst
On Wed, Jan 06, 1999 at 01:41:07PM +, John P . Looney wrote:
> Hi, sorry to bother you all about this, but I have a few questions. First:
>
> I'm working off the latest snapshot of Raidtools-0.90, and a 2.2pre1
> kernel, with RAID-1 built in (not as a module).
did you apply the raid patche
Hi, sorry to bother you all about this, but I have a few questions. First:
I'm working off the latest snapshot of Raidtools-0.90, and a 2.2pre1
kernel, with RAID-1 built in (not as a module).
In the QuickStart.RAID file, it says that mkraid will work like:
$ mkraid /etc/raid1.conf
It doe
52 matches
Mail list logo
