On Monday 14 February 2005 04:56, Tim Moore wrote:
>
> Also considered the MSI board but no numa memory interconnect and no 64bit
> slots.
>
I have some MSI boards here. The K8D Master3 has both NUMA and 64bit slots.
I've been running 2.6.10 flawlessy with more than a months uptime so far.
Andre
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Tim Moore wrote:
> Gordon Henderson wrote:
> > What I wanted was an 8-way RAID-1 for the boot partition (all of /, in
> > reality) and I've done this many times in the past on other 2-5 way
> > systems without issue. So I do the stuff I've done in the past, and theres
> > noth
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Tim Moore wrote:
> Gordon Henderson wrote:
> >
> > Anyone using Tyan Thunder K8W motherboards???
> >
> > I now know, there is a K8S (server?) version of that mobo, but at the time
> > it was all orderd, I wasn't aware of it - my thoughts are there there is
> > some sort of PCI
Gordon Henderson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Mark Hahn wrote:
I was about to post that I've solved my problems with that Tyan dual
opteron motherboard, but it's still crap. I upgraded the BIOS to the 2.02
beta and it seemed to work a lot better. Still couldn't boot off it with
all 8 drives in, bu
Gordon Henderson wrote:
What I wanted was an 8-way RAID-1 for the boot partition (all of /, in
reality) and I've done this many times in the past on other 2-5 way
systems without issue. So I do the stuff I've done in the past, and theres
nothing really new to me in that respect. (I'm using LILO) S
Gordon Henderson wrote:
Anyone using Tyan Thunder K8W motherboards???
I now know, there is a K8S (server?) version of that mobo, but at the time
it was all orderd, I wasn't aware of it - my thoughts are there there is
some sort of PCI/PCI-X problem with either the motherboard or the chipset,
and i
Mike Hardy wrote:
Its running x86_64 (Fedora Core 3) and the problem is rooted in the
chipset I believe. I don't think its Opterons per se, I think its just
the Athlon take two - which is to say that its a wonderful chip, but
some of the chipsets its saddled with are horrible, and careful
selec
Mark Hahn wrote:
Interesting - the private mail was from me, and I've got two dual
Opterons in service. The one with significantly more PCI activity has
significantly more problems then the one with less PCI activity.
that's pretty odd, since the most intense IO devices I know of
are cluster i
On Sun, 13 Feb 2005, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > Interesting - the private mail was from me, and I've got two dual
> > Opterons in service. The one with significantly more PCI activity has
> > significantly more problems then the one with less PCI activity.
>
> that's pretty odd, since the most intense I
> Interesting - the private mail was from me, and I've got two dual
> Opterons in service. The one with significantly more PCI activity has
> significantly more problems then the one with less PCI activity.
that's pretty odd, since the most intense IO devices I know of
are cluster interconnect
Gordon Henderson wrote:
> ...
It seemed more stable with just one PCI card in, so I have a 4-port card
on order as a last ditch attempt to make it work - I did try re-flashing
the BIOS on one board, (I have 2) as it seemed to be about a year old and
there are several updates on the Tyan web-site, h
Gordon Henderson wrote:
I have had a private email from someone who has experienced similar
lock-ups with twin Opteron systems and PCI cards, so from that point of
view it doesn't bode well.
I have some quad Opterons running too, and they seem fine, although they
are pure compute servers with just
On Fri, 4 Feb 2005, Andrew Walrond wrote:
> Hi Gordon,
>
> > Anyone using Tyan Thunder K8W motherboards???
>
> I'm using K8W's here with a combo od raid0/1 on on-board SATA, and its been
> rock solid for months (2.6.10). Looks like your problems are all with the PCI
> cards, but I can't help there
Hi Gordon,
On Thursday 03 February 2005 19:36, Gordon Henderson wrote:
>
> However, I then got production hardware - Tyan Thunder K8W twin Opteron
> board, 4-port SATA on-oboard, 2x2-port SATA in PCI slots (all SII chipset)
> and it all went pear-shaped from there. The system locks solid whenever
On Thu, 3 Feb 2005, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Guy wrote:
> > Would you say that the 2.6 Kernel is suitable for storing mission-critical
> > data, then?
>
> Sure. I'd trust 2.6 over 2.4 at this point.
This is interesting to hear.
> > I ask because I have read about a lot of problems with data corr
PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of H. Peter Anvin
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2005 11:40 AM
To: Ruth Ivimey-Cook
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH md 2 of 4] Fix raid6 problem
Ruth Ivimey-Cook wrote:
>
> Would you say that raid-6 is suitable for storing mission-cr
Guy wrote:
Would you say that the 2.6 Kernel is suitable for storing mission-critical
data, then?
Sure. I'd trust 2.6 over 2.4 at this point.
I ask because I have read about a lot of problems with data corruption and
oops on this list and the SCSI list. But in most or all cases the 2.4
Kernel doe
On Thu, Feb 03, 2005 at 02:12:38AM +, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Anyway... I'm thinking of sending in a patch to take out the
> "experimental" status of RAID-6. I have been running a 1 TB
> production server in 1-disk degraded mode for about a month now
> without incident.
Out of interest, how m
Lars Marowsky-Bree wrote:
On 2005-02-03T08:39:41, "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Yes, right now there is no RAID5->RAID6 conversion tool that I know of.
Hm. One of the checksums is identical, as is the disk layout of the
data, no?
No, the layout is different.
-hpa
-
To unsubsc
On 2005-02-03T08:39:41, "H. Peter Anvin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yes, right now there is no RAID5->RAID6 conversion tool that I know of.
Hm. One of the checksums is identical, as is the disk layout of the
data, no?
So wouldn't mdadm with the right parameters forcing the right super
block to
Ruth Ivimey-Cook wrote:
Would you say that raid-6 is suitable for storing mission-critical data,
then?
What I'd say is that I don't have any evidence it's not. Unfortunately,
that's not quite the same thing.
I have a .5TB raid5 array on 5 IDE disks, and given what has been said recently
about d
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:"A. James Lewis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.raid
>
>
> Sorry for the delay in replying, I've been using RAID6 in a real life
> situation with 2.6.9 + patch, for 2 months now, with 1.15Tb of storage,
> and I have had more than 1 drive
A. James Lewis wrote:
At the moment, I am experimenting with RAID on top of USB Mass Storage
devices... it's interesting because the USB system takes a significant
time to identify and make each drive available, and I have to determine if
all the drives have become available before starting any arr
Sorry for the delay in replying, I've been using RAID6 in a real life
situation with 2.6.9 + patch, for 2 months now, with 1.15Tb of storage,
and I have had more than 1 drive failure... as well as some rather
embarasing hardware corruption which I traced to a faulty IDE controller.
Dispite some r
24 matches
Mail list logo
