On Wed, Sep 23, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Joel Sing wrote:
> RAID5 should work (ignore RAID6 - it is still incomplete) and rebuilding
> should be functional:
>
> http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20150413071009
>
> When I reenabled RAID5, I had tested it reasonably as I could, but it still
> need
On Tuesday 22 September 2015 09:58:57 Karel Gardas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
> > Karel Gardas [gard...@gmail.com] wrote:
> >> Let me ask, should SR RAID5 survive such testing or is for example
> >> rebuilding with off-lined drive considered unsupported featur
On Monday 21 September 2015 23:02:39 Karel Gardas wrote:
> Hello,
>
> due to work on SR RAID1 check summing support where I've touched SR
> RAID internals (workunit scheduling) I'd like to test SR RAID5/6
> functionality on snapshot and on my tree to see that I've not broken
> the stuff while hack
On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 3:20 AM, Chris Cappuccio wrote:
> Karel Gardas [gard...@gmail.com] wrote:
>>
>> Let me ask, should SR RAID5 survive such testing or is for example
>> rebuilding with off-lined drive considered unsupported feature?
>>
>
> It's new, considered experimental and not well tested
Karel Gardas [gard...@gmail.com] wrote:
>
> Let me ask, should SR RAID5 survive such testing or is for example
> rebuilding with off-lined drive considered unsupported feature?
>
It's new, considered experimental and not well tested.
In my initial testing with RAID5, it was so slow as to be unu
Hello,
due to work on SR RAID1 check summing support where I've touched SR
RAID internals (workunit scheduling) I'd like to test SR RAID5/6
functionality on snapshot and on my tree to see that I've not broken
the stuff while hacking it. My current problem is that I'm not able to
come with some tes
6 matches
Mail list logo
