On Sun, Nov 2, 2008 at 1:03 AM, MHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Nov 2 01:56:11 mhrichter smartd[3121]: Device: /dev/sda, 4294967295
> Currently unreadable (pending) sectors
> Nov 2 01:56:11 mhrichter smartd[3121]: Device: /dev/sda, 4294967295
> Offline uncorrectable sectors
>
> In each case, i
On Sat, Nov 1, 2008 at 6:31 AM, Kai Schaetzl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Mhr wrote on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:59:40 -0700:
>
>> The one problem I've seen and posted here was w.r.t. smartd error
>> reports showing 2^32 - 1 errors on one of the disks (probably my
>> system disk) every few minutes.
>
> H
Mhr wrote on Wed, 29 Oct 2008 17:59:40 -0700:
> The one problem I've seen and posted here was w.r.t. smartd error
> reports showing 2^32 - 1 errors on one of the disks (probably my
> system disk) every few minutes.
How has this anything to do with "SATA problems/drive handling"? And could
you pl
On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 17:59 -0700, MHR wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Jim Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The only issue I've ever seen has been with the on-board fakeraid stuff
> > more and more vendors seem to be adding. I've been using SATA disks
> > with centos since the e
MHR wrote:
> I've heard now from more than one source about problems
> with CentOS
> (and RH) at least up through 5.2 w.r.t. SATA drive
> handling, and I've
> even reported on this myself in this list before.
>
> My question is, do we have any idea if 5.3 has any
> improvements in this area?
>
Jim Perrin wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:01 PM, MHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I've heard now from more than one source about problems with CentOS
>> (and RH) at least up through 5.2 w.r.t. SATA drive handling, and I've
>> even reported on this myself in this list before.
>>
>> My question
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:25 PM, Jim Perrin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The only issue I've ever seen has been with the onboard fakeraid stuff
> more and more vendors seem to be adding. I've been using SATA disks
> with centos since the early 4.x days without issue, so you have me at
> a bit of
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 5:12 PM, Karanbir Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> do you have any bug report numbers for these issues ?
>
No, and from what I saw on the RH bugzilla list of SATA disk related
bugs, none of them seem to be that serious except w.r.t. specific
controllers.
I will go back
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 8:01 PM, MHR <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've heard now from more than one source about problems with CentOS
> (and RH) at least up through 5.2 w.r.t. SATA drive handling, and I've
> even reported on this myself in this list before.
>
> My question is, do we have any idea i
MHR wrote:
I've heard now from more than one source about problems with CentOS
(and RH) at least up through 5.2 w.r.t. SATA drive handling, and I've
even reported on this myself in this list before.
My question is, do we have any idea if 5.3 has any improvements in this area?
do you have any
I've heard now from more than one source about problems with CentOS
(and RH) at least up through 5.2 w.r.t. SATA drive handling, and I've
even reported on this myself in this list before.
My question is, do we have any idea if 5.3 has any improvements in this area?
One of my cohorts here, who hap
11 matches
Mail list logo
