On Thu, Dec 09, 2004 at 12:36:56PM +1030, Greg 'groggy' Lehey wrote: > On Wednesday, 8 December 2004 at 11:52:55 +0100, Stijn Hoop wrote: > > AFAIK the only way to guarantee a consistent rebuild is to do it > > offline (at least in 4.x, haven't tested gvinum in 5.x yet). > > > > > To play it safe you might want to unmount the volume before starting. > > > > I *have* to. > > The issue is contention round where stripes are being written. The > code *should* avoid the contention, but it appears that there's a bug > there somewhere. I certainly agree with you that you should umount > the file system first.
Well, it is a workaround but certainly acceptable to me.
> There's no reason to believe that this problem exists in gvinum: I
> believe the code has been completely rewritten.
That is good to hear. I certainly have to further test gvinum RAID-5 in the
near future. Now that setstate, checkparity & rebuildparity have been
implemented there's not a technical reason not to, except for possible bugs.
--Stijn
--
"What kind of a two-bit operation are they running out of this treehouse,
Cooper? I have seen some slipshod backwater burgs, but this place takes the
cake."
-- Special Agent Albert Rosenfield, "Twin Peaks"
pgpZEy13hBx8E.pgp
Description: PGP signature
