Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
The RAID card itself may have a BBU, so during loss of power any cached
data *on the card* will be attempt to be flushed to disk... except the
PC (including hard disks -- unless they're powered from some other
source) is already down/offline by this point. And let's not f
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 10:05:43PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:33:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > > One of the main functions of softupdates is to order disk updates in such
> > > a way that the fs organizational integrity is maintained at all times.
> >
> > And w
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 07:33:47PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > One of the main functions of softupdates is to order disk updates in such
> > a way that the fs organizational integrity is maintained at all times.
>
> And we've recently found that this is simply not the case. The benefits
> o
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 08:41:59PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 06:12:07PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> > > Doesn't hw.ata.wc affect only card-level caching?
> >
> > hw.ata.wc causes the ata(4) subsystem to
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 06:12:07PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> > Doesn't hw.ata.wc affect only card-level caching?
>
> hw.ata.wc causes the ata(4) subsystem to disable write caching on all
> disks attached to the subsystem. It doe
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 04:38:49PM -0700, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> ...
> In this scenario, write caching on the disks is usually done by the
> controller itself (through a BIOS option), and not by FreeBSD.
This should have read: "... usually enabled/disabled by the controller
itself". :-) Sorry
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 06:12:07PM -0500, Rich Winkel wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 07:49:00PM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> > Given that you don't have a BBU, what is the status of write caching
> > on the individual hard drives? You'll have to use 3dm2 or the CLI
> > equivalent to investiga
On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 07:49:00PM +, Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Given that you don't have a BBU, what is the status of write caching
> on the individual hard drives? You'll have to use 3dm2 or the CLI
> equivalent to investigate this, as the RAID controller tends to hide
> that level of inform
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matthew Seaman wrote:
> Rich Fairbanks wrote:
>
>> Now, this is how I set up the array. I installed the card, popped in the
>> drives. The card bios found the drives and allowed me to setup in RAID 5.
>> Then, FreeBSD booted and found the "disk" as da
Rich Fairbanks wrote:
Now, this is how I set up the array. I installed the card, popped in the
drives. The card bios found the drives and allowed me to setup in RAID 5.
Then, FreeBSD booted and found the "disk" as da0. I want the entire array to
be one big chunk of space. In other words, I don't
Hi,
I'm new to FreeBSD (and UNIX in general), and I have read through the
handbook and various websites to gain some insight on this question, but
haven't found a concrete solution yet, and I'm hoping you guys can help.
I'm wanting to build a FreeBSD 7.0 based file server for a small/medium
compa
I currently have an Adaptec 2010S raid card and want
to upgrade to a 2120S raid card. Any one know how to
do this with out wiping out the data on the hard
drive? Im currently running FreeBSD 4.10 and have both
DPT and AAC drivers in my kernel
Thanks
___
Hi,
I'm running FreeBSD 5.4-R with the official maintenance patches.
I've recently encountered the following issue while doing 'dump -L' of
an partition:
kernel: panic: snapacct_ufs2: bad block
That's pretty all I've got, because my Mylex controller doesn't want to
be a dump device:
[16:51] ho
Martin McCann wrote:
Hi all,
I've recently updated to 64 bit (spending way to much money in the process!)
and want to get freebsd 6.0 64 bit installed. I am running windows 64 on it
(the main reason for the upgrade was games) so it will be dual boot. I have
freebsd on a 32 bit system on a k
Hi all,
I've recently updated to 64 bit (spending way to much money in the process!)
and want to get freebsd 6.0 64 bit installed. I am running windows 64 on it
(the main reason for the upgrade was games) so it will be dual boot. I have
freebsd on a 32 bit system on a kvm switch, so it is n
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandy
>Rutherford
>Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 1:15 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>Subject: RE: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
>
>>>
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 23:37:20 -0700,
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Seagate wrote a paper on this titled:
> "Seagate Technology Paper 338.1 Estimating Drive Reliability in
> Desktop Computers and Consumer Electronic Systems"
> that explains how they define MTBF.
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandy
>Rutherford
>Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 3:09 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Alex Zbyslaw
>Subject: RE: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
&
Steve Bertrand wrote:
I know this technique isn't feasable in all situations, but I try to
have duplicate hardware. Especially with my IDE RAID1 servers, I'll from
time to time during a maintenance window pop one of the RAID disks out,
throw it in another box and ensure BOTH machines boot up wi
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa
> Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 9:28 AM
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt
> Cc: P.U.Kruppa; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
> Subject: RE: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
&g
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 01:00:09 -0700,
> "Ted Mittelstaedt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> With a RAID-1 card, mirroring, there are 2 ways to setup reads.
> The first way makes the assumption that you are mirroring purely
> for fault tolerance. In that case you would NOT see a ANY read fr
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa
>Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 6:28 AM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: P.U.Kruppa; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>Subject: RE: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
>
>> As
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandy
>Rutherford
>Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2005 6:16 PM
>To: Alex Zbyslaw
>Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; Ted Mittelstaedt
>Subject: Re: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
&
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 11:36:32 +0100,
> Alex Zbyslaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>>> Sandy
>>> Rutherford
>>> Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 10:52 PM
>>>
>>>
>>> In order to boost read performance, a RAID card should interleave
>>> reading from a RAID-1 volu
On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
What model of Proliant?
ML 350 G4
Oh good, we have a customer that has been looking at one of these
for FreeBSD and I'm glad to hear that you didn't have problems with it.
Absolutely smooth - and I
Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
Sandy
Rutherford
Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 10:52 PM
In order to boost read performance, a RAID card should interleave
reading from a RAID-1 volume by reading alternately from one drive and
then the other. You can see this in alternate blinking of the
activity lig
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa
>Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 6:37 PM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: P.U.Kruppa; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>Subject: RE: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
>
>On Sun,
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Sandy
>Rutherford
>Sent: Sunday, June 19, 2005 10:52 PM
>
>In order to boost read performance, a RAID card should interleave
>reading from a RAID-1 volume by reading alternately from one drive and
>then the
> On Sun, 19 Jun 2005 12:28:14 +0100,
> Alex Zbyslaw <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> A word of caution, though. A Linux system (which I help administer) had
> two SCSI disks mounted as RAID-1 through some kind of Adaptec
> controller. Recently the machine crashed and it transpires that
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
What model of Proliant?
ML 350 G4
Uli.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa
Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:56 PM
To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject: Yet another RAID
What model of Proliant?
Ted
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of P.U.Kruppa
>Sent: Saturday, June 18, 2005 10:56 PM
>To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>Subject: Yet another RAID Question (YARQ)
>
>
>Hi everb
On Sun, 19 Jun 2005, Alex Zbyslaw wrote:
P.U.Kruppa wrote:
our school has just received a new HP ProLiant and I set up FreeBSD 5.4
-RELEASE with a RAID 1 system on it (using ciss driver).
Is there any software tool which can show me the state of the two SCSI
discs (if one is failing or if the
P.U.Kruppa wrote:
our school has just received a new HP ProLiant and I set up FreeBSD
5.4 -RELEASE with a RAID 1 system on it (using ciss driver).
Is there any software tool which can show me the state of the two SCSI
discs (if one is failing or if they are mirrored sorrectly) or is it
suffici
Hi everbody,
our school has just received a new HP ProLiant and I set up
FreeBSD 5.4 -RELEASE with a RAID 1 system on it (using ciss
driver).
Is there any software tool which can show me the state of the two
SCSI discs (if one is failing or if they are mirrored sorrectly)
or is it sufficient
On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 07:58:59PM +, Mike Woods wrote:
> > Why does the os even detect the individual drives when the raid card made
> > it a
> > single drive and the os install is after the raid bios???
>
> Because the chipset provides means to control both single disks and
> arrays thus y
Why does the os even detect the individual drives when the raid card made it a
single drive and the os install is after the raid bios???
Because the chipset provides means to control both single disks and
arrays thus you get both, just the way that card chose to do things :)
-
Mike Wo
Mike Woods said:
> Jason Lieurance wrote:
>
>> I installed everything on 'ad4' but it I think I wanted to install it to
>> 'ar0'.
>> Am I right? Thanks.
>
> Yep, ar is the Atapi Raid driver, ad is just the individual disk :)
>
> --
> Mike Woods
> IT Technician
Why does the os even de
Mike Woods wrote:
Yep, ar is the Atapi Raid driver, ad is just the individual disk :)
s/Atapi/ata/
Less haste, more coffee, the key to better typing.
--
Mike Woods
IT Technician
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freeb
Jason Lieurance wrote:
I installed everything on 'ad4' but it I think I wanted to install it to 'ar0'.
Am I
right? Thanks.
Yep, ar is the Atapi Raid driver, ad is just the individual disk :)
--
Mike Woods
IT Technician
___
freebsd-questions@f
Hello,
I have a 5.2 FBSD system with a highpoint ATA raid controller and 2 x WD 200 ATA
HD's. I created a Raid 1 array in the HP bios.
dmesg output:
ad4: 194481MB [395136/16/63] at ata2-master UDMA133
GEOM: create disk ad6 dp=0xc485b860
ad6: 194481MB [395136/16/63] at ata3-master UDMA133
GEOM:
Are there any SCSI raid controllers that have real-time array rebuild
capabilities/tools for FreeBSD?? All of the ones I have used so far
require reboot for rebuilding/modifying. Also are there any good tools for
monitoring RAID Arrays???
___
[EMAIL PROTE
41 matches
Mail list logo
