Brian A. Seklecki schreef:
raid(4) hasn't been touched in a while (years), so short answer: No.
NetBSD is still actively committing to it, though, and has functional
background parity recalculation.
I understand there is interest in replacing RAIDFrame instead of
resynchronizing the subtree.
In the mean time, find a hardware RAID Controller that can be managed
by OpenBSD via bio(4) and grab a UPS that works with upsd(8).
~BAS
On Thu, 27 Sep 2007, Rob wrote:
On 9/25/07, Matt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm running a RAID1 mirror on OpenBSD 4.1 (webserver)
On a power failure the parity becomes dirty and needs rewriting, which
results in > 1.5 hours 'downtime'.
Is it safe to background this in /etc/rc or is that a no-no?
I found a reference this was possible/safe on-list but it was a) 2003
and b) dealt with RAID5.
I'd like to make sure I am not doing something dangerous.
I frankly don't know enough to guarantee that this is safe, or not,
but I had a RAID1 with big disks on an ancient machine that took about
26 hours to check parity (! -- this wasn't my idea), and I modified
its rc to boot up, and then begin performing the parity check in the
background.
The only caveat I would give is that the operating system was
installed and running on a 3rd, separate disk, and that network access
to the mirrored drives was disabled until the parity rewrite was
complete.
- R.
Thanks.
As I encountered a locked up system (due to quota weirdness) before I
received your answers I actually took my chances and tried this.
This was in the middle of the night and disk activity was very low (but
not entirely silent, this is a live machine) and it worked out okay.
Obviously that's no guarantee it will work next time.
As for the suggestion of hardware raid - unfortunately this is a live
server. If I migrate it to another machine I will definitely try
hardware raid
I know it is a lot faster but would that solve the parity problem on
boot completely? 'man bio' doesn't seem to answer that.
Matt
