Jyri Hovila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm experimenting with Linux software RAID recovery. My target is to
> be able to recover RAID 5 from individual drives without using the
> Linux RAID tools - I mean mdadm and the others. I know it's not the
> easiest way, but I *do* need to figure out a w
"Patrick Hoover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Top posting makes it hard to keep meaningful context in the discussion.
It would be nice if you would avoid that in future.
[... RAID on USB attached disks ...]
> With USB interfaced disks, it appears that you lose access to the
> SMART capabilities b
"Patrick Hoover" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is anyone else having issues with USB interfaced disks to implement
> RAID? Any thoughts on Pros / Cons for doing this?
I have done, as a trial. USB disk support in recent 2.6 based
distributions was quite stable and reliable, and I had no signifi
Nix <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On 22 Mar 2006, Dan Christensen prattled cheerily:
[...]
> Last I heard the Debian initramfs constructs RAID arrays by explicitly
> specifying the devices that make them up. This is, um, a bad idea: the
> first time a disk fails or your kernel renumbers them you'
Ken Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Anybody tried a Raid1 or Raid5 on USB2.
>
> If so did it crawl or was it usable ?
Yes, I used this for two by two drive RAID-1 arrays.
It was usable, but not pleasantly. The machine became very I/O bound,
with human scale delays introduced into previousl
Simon Valiquette <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Francois Barre a écrit :
>> 2006/1/5, Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>>Francois Barre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> AFAIK, ext3 volume cannot be bigger than 4TB on a 32 bits system. I
> thin
Francois Barre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 2006/1/5, Daniel Pittman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Francois Barre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> G'day Francois.
>>
>> > Well, I think everything is in the subject... I am looking at this
>
Francois Barre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
G'day Francois.
> Well, I think everything is in the subject... I am looking at this
> solution for a 6*250GB raid5 data server, evolving in a 12*250 rai5 in
> the months to come... Performance is absolutely not a big issue for
> me, but I would not appr
"David M. Strang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> I'm not very initrd savvy; and I'm having a heck of a time making the
> initramfs instructions in mdadm work. Does anyone have a working example
> of them?
[...]
> I've added a /dev directory to the init.cpio.gz as well. It seems like I
> ma
Max Waterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Daniel Pittman wrote:
>> Mitchell Laks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>> Then, list your arrays:
>> ARRAY /dev/md2 level=raid1 num-devices=2
>> UUID=529d70fa:e5fe992b:ceb05593:bfcc6c25
>> That will caus
Max Waterman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Daniel Pittman wrote:
>> Sebastian Kuzminsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>> Mitchell Laks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>> What does doing
>>>>
>>>> mdadm -Cv -n2 -l1 /dev/md0 /dev/s
Sebastian Kuzminsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Mitchell Laks <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> What does doing
>>
>> mdadm -Cv -n2 -l1 /dev/md0 /dev/sda /dev/sdb
>>
>> do to the partition tables???
>> (And why can I still access the data if I messed up the partitions??? very
>> odd).
>> Can you
"Guy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>> I've been working on a RAID setup with dual RAID controllers and
>> three expansion boxes - 48 disks in all, including data, parity and
>> global spares.
[...]
>> They don't feel that the storage has to be blazing fast, and 100% uptime
>> isn't paramou
Neil Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thursday August 4, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Oopps
>> I meant to send the following in reply to a recent message from
>> Gregory Seidman, but inadvertently send it in reply to an earlier
>> message from Aaron Botsis (which I must have missed..)
; (mounted as /home) was still readable and writable even though
>>> /proc/mdstat said:
>
> On 7/8/05, Daniel Pittman wrote:
>> What you want to do is start the array as degraded, using *only* the
>> devices that were part of the disk set. Substitute 'missing' for th
On 8 Jul 2005, Melinda Taylor wrote:
> We have a computer based at the South Pole which has a degraded raid 5
> array across 4 disks. One of the 4 HDD's mechanically failed but we have
> bought the majority of the system back online except for the raid5
> array. I am pretty sure that data on the
On 10 Mar 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an installer (http://sourceforge.net/projects/terraformix/) that
> creates Raid 1 arrays, previously the arrays were created with mkraid
> using the --dangerous-no-resync option. I am now required to build the
> arrays with mdadm and have th
On 16 Feb 2005, Clemens Eisserer wrote:
> I am trying to use my external USB2.0 hd for raid1 in my laptop,
> however autodetection does not work and I do not really know - but I
> have at least a theory.
>
> What i did till now:
> 1.) set the partition-type of both partitiuons from 83 (Linux) to fd
18 matches
Mail list logo
