On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 08:50:37PM -, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2024-12-09, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
> > I have a system with 4 3TB hard drives in a softraid(4) RAID 5 array. I
> > would like to expand the array to use much larger hard drives. I could
> > offline one d
On 2024-12-09, Bryan Vyhmeister wrote:
> I have a system with 4 3TB hard drives in a softraid(4) RAID 5 array. I
> would like to expand the array to use much larger hard drives. I could
> offline one drive, replace it with a larger drive, and then create a new
> 'd' RAID par
I have a system with 4 3TB hard drives in a softraid(4) RAID 5 array. I
would like to expand the array to use much larger hard drives. I could
offline one drive, replace it with a larger drive, and then create a new
'd' RAID partition of the new size (with fdisk(8) and disklabel(8). Th
On 2024-06-17, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2024-06-15, Marco van Hulten wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I got a new amd64 system with 3 NVMe disks of each 2 TB, with the idea
>> to put them in RAID-5. I did not realise until now that one cannot
>> boot from RAID-5.
On 2024-06-15, Marco van Hulten wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I got a new amd64 system with 3 NVMe disks of each 2 TB, with the idea
> to put them in RAID-5. I did not realise until now that one cannot
> boot from RAID-5.
Why do you want to run three drives in softraid RAID5?
You&
On Sun, 16 Jun 2024 11:57:13 -0400 Nick Holland wrote:
> On 6/15/24 09:05, Marco van Hulten wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > I got a new amd64 system with 3 NVMe disks of each 2 TB, with the
> > idea to put them in RAID-5. I did not realise until now that one
> > cannot
On 6/15/24 09:05, Marco van Hulten wrote:
Hello,
I got a new amd64 system with 3 NVMe disks of each 2 TB, with the idea
to put them in RAID-5. I did not realise until now that one cannot
boot from RAID-5.
Would a good approach be to create a root device on one disk (and maybe
altroots on one
On Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:05:07 +0100,
Marco van Hulten wrote:
>
> Would a good approach be to create a root device on one disk (and maybe
> altroots on one or both of the others) and use the rest of all disks as
> RAID-5 device? Or is there a good reason to boot from a disk separat
Hello,
I got a new amd64 system with 3 NVMe disks of each 2 TB, with the idea
to put them in RAID-5. I did not realise until now that one cannot
boot from RAID-5.
Would a good approach be to create a root device on one disk (and maybe
altroots on one or both of the others) and use the rest of
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 08:17:27PM +0100, 04-psyche.tot...@icloud.com wrote:
> From my reading of /etc/rc, it seems that at shutdown or reboot, the OS will
> automatically unmount everything.
>
> So that will unmount my encrypted partition.
>
> However, it does not run bioctl -d sd* for the pseu
From my reading of /etc/rc, it seems that at shutdown or reboot, the OS will
automatically unmount everything.
So that will unmount my encrypted partition.
However, it does not run bioctl -d sd* for the pseudo-device.
So I guess the question become, is it a problem to exit the system without
d
Personally, I'd just have your encrypted filesystem not listed in
/etc/fstab at all, since it can't be mounted without attaching the
softraid device manually anyway. Since the password is needed in every
case, just attach the softraid device with bioctl and mount the
filesystem with mount when
Hi all,
on my main hard drive, I have a partition `p` that I have encrypted in the
following way:
$bioctl -c C -l sd0p softraid0
-> This created the sd1 pseudo-device, on which I ran the following:
$fdisk -g sd1
$disklabel -E sd1 # created partition i, to take all the space. This is the
uniq
Hi misc,
I'm practicing data recovery scenarios with a RAID 1 array on softraid0.
optiplex# bioctl -i softraid0
Volume Status Size Device
softraid0 0 Online64022953984 sd0 RAID1
0 Online64022953984 0:0.0 noencl
1 O
Hi all,
did anyone installed and boot successfully OpenBSD on Dell BOSS-S1
adapter or HBA330 non-raid controller ?
I've got Dell R740xd in lab and of course for storage controllers there
are BOSS-S1 and HBA330. :)
OpenBSD can be installed on these controllers but unfortunately it panic
at
On March 30, 2023 10:36:01 PM MDT, Kenneth Gober wrote:
>On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 12:37 PM Kihaguru Gathura
>wrote:
>
SNIP
>
>In general I prefer hardware RAID because it's more likely you'll be able
>to easily boot your
>system if the array is running in
Thanks for the info.
Regards,
Kihaguru.
On Fri, Mar 31, 2023 at 7:36 AM Kenneth Gober wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 12:37 PM Kihaguru Gathura <
> kihagurugath...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Is hardware RAID on Poweredge servers (T340, PERC H330 in particular)
>>
On Thu, Mar 30, 2023 at 12:37 PM Kihaguru Gathura
wrote:
> Is hardware RAID on Poweredge servers (T340, PERC H330 in particular)
> generally stable enough for production or is it safer to stick with OpenBSD
> softraid?
>
I haven't used the H330, but the PERC 5/i and the PERC
On 30.3.2023. 18:33, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Is hardware RAID on Poweredge servers (T340, PERC H330 in particular)
> generally stable enough for production or is it safer to stick with OpenBSD
> softraid?
>
Hi,
not sure if there is big differences between H330
Hello,
Is hardware RAID on Poweredge servers (T340, PERC H330 in particular)
generally stable enough for production or is it safer to stick with OpenBSD
softraid?
Regards,
Kihaguru.
Namaste Misc,
ASSUMPTION
Consider two disks sd0 and sd1 assembled into sd2 with RAID 1C as the
discipline.
QUESTION
Which of the following is the correct way to write random data for the
RAID 1C discipline during installation?
1) # dd if=/dev/urandom bs=1m 2>dd.result | tee /dev/rsd0c >
Hi,
Nick Holland wrote on Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 11:30:58AM -0500:
> On 1/13/22 5:58 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>> On 2022-01-13, Aleksander Dzierżanowski wrote:
>>> Is 'Adaptec 8405 SGL' hardware raid controller working under OpenBSD?
>>> I saw there is *so
On 1/13/22 5:58 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
On 2022-01-13, Aleksander Dzierżanowski wrote:
Hi,
Is 'Adaptec 8405 SGL' hardware raid controller working under OpenBSD?
I saw there is *some* Adaptec support, but the model is not listed explicitly.
Please advise if I should try
On 2022-01-13, Aleksander Dzierżanowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is 'Adaptec 8405 SGL' hardware raid controller working under OpenBSD?
> I saw there is *some* Adaptec support, but the model is not listed explicitly.
> Please advise if I should try to rent a dedicaated server w
i0: 544 targets
The server has 2 disks. The error originally occurred with a soft RAID
configuration, and I reinstalled without RAID to test. The error always
occurs with a simple "dd" on the second disk partition, but not on the
first disk partition. The error occurs after OpenBSD has ju
On Wed, Apr 28, 2021 at 04:38:35PM +0800, Fung wrote:
> OpenBSD 6.9 RAID 1C (encrypted raid1) softraid discipline can't boot
>
> OpenBSD 6.9 (GENERIC.MP) #473: Mon Apr 19 10:40:28 MDT 2021
>
> one disk, shell create RAID CRYPTO, install system ok, boot ok
> two di
OpenBSD 6.9 RAID 1C (encrypted raid1) softraid discipline can't boot
OpenBSD 6.9 (GENERIC.MP) #473: Mon Apr 19 10:40:28 MDT 2021
one disk, shell create RAID CRYPTO, install system ok, boot ok
two disk, shell create RAID 1, install system ok, boot ok
two disk, shell create RAID 1C ok, in
On 2021-04-21, Kent Watsen wrote:
> - When ZFS is told to use the SSD, it starts the partition
> on sector 256 (not the default sector 34) to ensure good
> SSD NAND alignment.
The OS doesn't get all that close to the NAND layer with typical
computer component SSD drives, t
[My previous message was somewhat garbled when reflected back at me. It looks
better in the archives here:
https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=161902769301731&w=2. I’m resending as
plain-text to see if the problem is on my end.]
I’m running OpenBSD on top of bHyve using virtual disks allocat
I’m running OpenBSD on top of bHyve using virtual disks allocated out of ZFS
pools. While not the same setup, some concepts carry over…
I have two types of pools:
1) an “expensive" pool for fast random IO:
- this pool is made up stripes of SSD-based vdevs.
- ZFS is configured
Christian, Otto, Thanks for your feedback on this one
Ill research it further,
but NTFS has 4K, 8K 32K and 64K Allocation units on the
filessystem and for Microsoft windows running Exchange or Database workloads
they were recommending alignment of the NTFS partitions
on the 1MB offset also.
Tom Smyth:
> if you were to have a 1MB file or a database that needed to read 1MB
> of data, i
> f the partitions are not aligned then
> your underlying storage system need to load 2 chunks or write 2
> chunks for 1 MB of data, written,
You seem to assume that FFS2 would align a 1MB file on an
| OpenBSD-Gusest-Disk0.vmdk
> |vmware datastore-- | 1MB allocation
> |Logical Storage Device / RAID---|
> |SSD or DISK storage --|1MB allocation unit (on some SSDs)
>
> Figure 2 of the following paper shows what
> https://www.usenix.org/legacy
1MB,
and that aligning your file system to 1MB would improve performance
|OpenBSD Filesystem --| FFS-Filesystem
|VMDK Virtual Disk file for Guest | OpenBSD-Gusest-Disk0.vmdk
|vmware datastore-- | 1MB allocation
|Logical Storage Device / RAID---|
|SSD or DISK storage
unks for 1 MB of data, written,
>
> So *worst* case you would double the workload for the storage hardware
> (SSD or Hardware RAID with large chunks) for each transaction
> on writing to SSDs if you are not aligned one could *worst *case
> double the write / wear rate.
>
> T
hardware
(SSD or Hardware RAID with large chunks) for each transaction
on writing to SSDs if you are not aligned one could *worst *case
double the write / wear rate.
The improvement would be less for accessing small files and writing small files
(as they would need to be across 2 Chunks )
The
Tom Smyth:
> just installing todays snapshot and the default offset on amd64 is 64,
> (as it has been for as long as I can remember)
It was changed from 63 in 2010.
> Is it worth while updating the defaults so that OpenBSD partition
> layout will be optimal for SSD or other Virt
Hello,
just installing todays snapshot and the default offset on amd64 is 64,
(as it has been for as long as I can remember)
Is it worth while updating the defaults so that OpenBSD partition
layout will be optimal for SSD or other Virtualized RAID environments
with 1MB Chunks,
Is there a down
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 9 Mar 2021 16:37:00 -0700
Duncan Patton a Campbell wrote:
> Howdy all?
>
> Does anyone know how to rebuild a raid1 with additional chunks?
> ... that is without losing the "degraded" volume?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dhu
>
So as it turns (in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Howdy all?
Does anyone know how to rebuild a raid1 with additional chunks?
... that is without losing the "degraded" volume?
Thanks,
Dhu
- --
Je suis Canadien. Ce n'est pas Francais ou Anglaise.
C'est une esp`ece de sauvage: ne oblivisca
n
> > > 6.7++
> > >
> > > I'm having problems that could be bios limitations, OS, or a bad SATA
> > > (Pwr?) cable.
> > > Currently I'm going with the latter and rebuilding the RAID (again) but
> > > was
> > > just wondering
;m having problems that could be bios limitations, OS, or a bad SATA
> > (Pwr?) cable.
> > Currently I'm going with the latter and rebuilding the RAID (again) but was
> > just wondering if anyone has run a config with more than one RAID array...
> > ...
> >
On 1/12/21 9:41 PM, Duncan Patton a Campbell wrote:
Howdy all? I'm wondering if more than one RAID1 array is supported in 6.7++
I'm having problems that could be bios limitations, OS, or a bad SATA (Pwr?)
cable.
Currently I'm going with the latter and rebuilding the RAID (agai
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Howdy all? I'm wondering if more than one RAID1 array is supported in 6.7++
I'm having problems that could be bios limitations, OS, or a bad SATA (Pwr?)
cable.
Currently I'm going with the latter and rebuilding the RAID (agai
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:52 PM Justin Noor
wrote:
> We need to create a partition on an OpenBSD server for the sole purpose of
> mounting RAID arrays.
>
> The mount point would be something like:
>
> /data
>
> Then we will create directories in that partition and mou
On Sep 16 20:30:45, justinnoor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Hello Misc,
>
> We need to create a partition on an OpenBSD server for the sole purpose of
> mounting RAID arrays.
>
> The mount point would be something like:
>
> /data
>
> Then we will create directories i
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 1:51 PM Justin Noor wrote:
>
> Hello Misc,
>
Hi!
> We need to create a partition on an OpenBSD server for the sole purpose of
> mounting RAID arrays.
>
> [LE SNIP]
> How big should this partition be?
As big as you need to store any actual data
Hello Misc,
We need to create a partition on an OpenBSD server for the sole purpose of
mounting RAID arrays.
The mount point would be something like:
/data
Then we will create directories in that partition and mount the arrays:
/data/raid1
/data/raid2
/data/raid3
How big should this
On Sat, Oct 5, 2019 at 8:39 AM Nick Holland wrote:
>
> On 10/4/19 8:37 AM, sven falempin wrote:
> ...
> > How [do I] check the state of the MIRROR raid array , to detect large
> > amount of failures on one of the two disk ?
> >
> > Best.
> >
>
> f
rEdge R230 for few months.
Our servers are running Openbsd 6.5 OS and we have had several system
freezes (where only a hard reboot fixed the problem).
We identified the source of theses freezes, so that every time the servers
hanged, we find the error below in the Raid H330 logs.
"Asser
freezes (where only a hard reboot fixed the problem).
>
> We identified the source of theses freezes, so that every time the servers
> hanged, we find the error below in the Raid H330 logs.
>
> "Assertion failure in ../../raid/mpthostcmd.c at line 656:MonTask: line 656
> in
Hi,
We have the same server running FreeBSD but the Perc card is configured
to pass through (ZFS). No problem so far, uptime 145 days.
We identified the source of theses freezes, so that every time the
servers hanged, we find the error below in the Raid H330 logs.
"Assertion failu
s, so that every time the
servers hanged, we find the error below in the Raid H330 logs.
"Assertion failure in ../../raid/mpthostcmd.c at line 656:MonTask: line
656 in file ../../raid/mpthostcmd.c Invader: sp=c00ae118 online reset -
no input needed_esram_initial_cod
On 10/4/19 8:37 AM, sven falempin wrote:
...
> How [do I] check the state of the MIRROR raid array , to detect large
> amount of failures on one of the two disk ?
>
> Best.
>
fsck has NOTHING to do with the status of your drives.
It's a File System ChecKer. Your disk
RAID is not a backup solution and should not be treated as one
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019, 3:41 PM sven falempin wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 8:10 AM Nick Holland
> wrote:
> >
> > On 10/3/19 10:01 AM, sven falempin wrote:
> > > Dear readers,
> > >
> > >
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 8:10 AM Nick Holland wrote:
>
> On 10/3/19 10:01 AM, sven falempin wrote:
> > Dear readers,
> >
> > I was running a OpenBSD (6.4) device, with a raid mirror array.
> > One of the disk failed, so the system ask me to fsck,
>
> Probably
On 10/3/19 10:01 AM, sven falempin wrote:
> Dear readers,
>
> I was running a OpenBSD (6.4) device, with a raid mirror array.
> One of the disk failed, so the system ask me to fsck,
Probably not quite that simple. More likely, the disk failed,
that took the system down hard, and
Thanks for the cautionary tale. Will definitely keep this in mind for
any RAID arrays I manage.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 2:04 AM sven falempin wrote:
>
> Dear readers,
>
> I was running a OpenBSD (6.4) device, with a raid mirror array.
> One of the disk failed, so the system
Dear readers,
I was running a OpenBSD (6.4) device, with a raid mirror array.
One of the disk failed, so the system ask me to fsck,
which I did before checking the raid status manually ( :'( ) ,
THEN I rebooted and softraid told me: one of the hard drive is dead.
But fsck already destroyed
Thanks for the detailed explanation.
Really appreciated.
All the best
Regards,
Kihaguru.
On Mon, Sep 2, 2019 at 6:17 PM Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 05:32:53PM +0300, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Unable to boot with the following message
> >
> > open /pci@8
rwd2msd1g stderr wd1f
> wd2p
> > rcd0arsd1arsd2krwd1drwd2nsd1h stdinwd1g
> zero
> > rcd0crsd1brsd2lrwd1erwd2osd1i stdout wd1h
> > rd0a rsd1crsd2mrwd1frwd2psd1j tty wd1i
> >
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 05:32:53PM +0300, Kihaguru Gathura wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Unable to boot with the following message
>
> open /pci@83,4000/FJSV,ulsa@2,1/disk@0,0:a/etc/random.seed: Invalid argument
> open /pci@83,4000/FJSV,ulsa@2,1/disk@0,0:a/bsd: Invalid argument
> Boot device: /pci@83,4000/F
/sizes be on cylinder
> boundaries.
> Partition offsets/sizes will be rounded to the nearest cylinder
> automatically.
> Label editor (enter '?' for help at any prompt)
> sd1> p
> OpenBSD area: 0-143374738; size: 143374738; free: 143374738
> #
l -E sd2
disklabel: /dev/rsd2c: Device not configured
www# fdisk -iy sd0
sh: fdisk: not found
www# disklabel -E sd0
This platform requires that partition offsets/sizes be on cylinder
boundaries.
Partition offsets/sizes will be rounded to the nearest cylinder
automatically.
Label editor (enter '?&
or /var/ that's not on
your primary softraid crypto device?
| In fstab, I set the RAID partition to noauto and disable automatic fsck.
| Then in rc.local call 'bioctl blah && fsck UUID.partition && mount /srv'
|
| I use a password so it's interative for me and
trondd writes:
> On Sun, May 5, 2019 3:57 pm, cho...@jtan.com wrote:
> > My goals are:
> >
> > * /etc/rc already handles fsck of plaintext devices mentioned in
> > /etc/fstab.
> > * /etc/rc already handles mount of plaintext devices mentioned in
> > /etc/fstab.
> > * I would like to activate
o that code somebody else has written can do them
> for me).
> * /etc/rc.local is called too late.
>
It's really not that big of a deal to call 'fsck' and 'mount' yourself in
rc.local.
Unless you have system data on /srv (which would be it's own inconsisten
), the less likely you will run into bugs that are
> not reproducible by others.
I have no problem with deviating from the standard. I know what I'm
getting myself into and I know how to forge the pieces back together
again :)
I should probably come clean and point out that, having rea
On Sun, May 05, 2019 at 08:57:55PM +0300, cho...@jtan.com wrote:
[...]
> Currently after every upgrade I patch /etc/rc to run /etc/rc.blockdev
> (containing bioctl -cC -p /etc/sd0.key -l sd0a softraid0) before the
> additional filesystems are checked or mounted.
The order of sdX may change if e.g.
I have a laptop with two hard drives, a small fast ssd and a large slow
hdd (since replaced with a larger fast ssd). Both drives are encrypted
using bioctl. sd1 is the smaller boot device which becomes sd2, sd0 is
the larger device which becomes sd3. sd2 is activated before the kernel
by the bootlo
On Sun, Nov 18, 2018 at 04:38:06PM +0100, Martin Sukany wrote:
> Hi,
>
> probably I'm overlooking something ...
>
> I have following disk layout:
> sd0, sd1 - physical drives
> sd2 - RAID 1 array with only "a" partiton on which CRYPTO device is created,
&g
Hi,
probably I'm overlooking something ...
I have following disk layout:
sd0, sd1 - physical drives
sd2 - RAID 1 array with only "a" partiton on which CRYPTO device is
created,
sd3 - used as "connection point" for crypted device.
So, finally the system is ins
Le 30/04/2018 à 04:14, Nick Holland a écrit :
Did you disable the RAID functionality of this card? If not, the BIOS
probably tried to "rebuild" one disk onto the other, causing you all
kinds of pain. softraid has to do everything for this to work properly.
Nick.
Hi,
I will
On 04/29/18 20:23, Mimoza wrote:
>
>
> Le 30/04/2018 à 00:01, Mimoza a écrit :
>> Hi,
>> I have a problem to create a second RAID 1 on my router an Soekris
>> 6501-70 (http://www.soekris.com/products/net6501-1.html)
> […]
>> I can rebuild the o
Le 30/04/2018 à 00:01, Mimoza a écrit :
Hi,
I have a problem to create a second RAID 1 on my router an Soekris
6501-70 (http://www.soekris.com/products/net6501-1.html)
[…]
I can rebuild the offline device but he still offline …
So, there any option or configuration to explain/solve that
Hi,
I have a problem to create a second RAID 1 on my router an Soekris
6501-70 (http://www.soekris.com/products/net6501-1.html)
The first RAID 1 is on 2 m-sata SSD (sd0+sd1=sd4) and is fine.
The second is connected to a PCI-E to S-ATA expansion card
(https://www.aliexpress.com/item/PCI-E-to
Le 26/04/2018 à 14:13, Stuart Henderson a écrit :
I don't know if is important but the faulty HDD have some bad sector.
Oh, if you have bad sectors showing up then you should definitely replace
it and not use it.
You are right … i'll looking for a new HDD.
On 2018-04-26, MImoza wrote:
>
> Hi Stuart,
> Thanks for your help.
>
> Well i downloaded the 6.2 kernel here :
> https://mirrors.ircam.fr/pub/OpenBSD/6.2/i386/
>
> renamed it as bsd_62, copy in / and boot with the following commande :
> > boot bsd_62
>
> And nothing change …
>
> softraid0 at root
Le 26/04/2018 à 09:40, Stuart Henderson a écrit :
On 2018-04-25, MImoza wrote:
I have swapped out hardware (cable, HDD, port), re-created the RAID from
scratch, but at each time the Thosiba HDD is offline at reboot.
I don't think it's hardware incompatibility because with 6.2 ever
On 2018-04-25, MImoza wrote:
> I have swapped out hardware (cable, HDD, port), re-created the RAID from
> scratch, but at each time the Thosiba HDD is offline at reboot.
> I don't think it's hardware incompatibility because with 6.2 everything
> was Ok.
> I think i
Hi @misc,
I have a problem with a RAID 1 on OpenBSD 6.3.
Hardware : 6501-70 Soekris router
(http://www.soekris.com/products/net6501-1.html), that I use among other
things as
I added an PCI 2 port S-ATA card
(https://www.aliexpress.com/item/PCI-E-to-2-Port-SATA-III-3-0-RAID-Card-88SE9218
ot; 4.2BSD partition, a "b" swap partition,
and then a "m" RAID partition:
# disklabel sd0
# /dev/rsd0c:
type: SCSI
disk: SCSI disk
label: INTEL SSDSA2BW16
duid: 43d094716532e926
flags:
bytes/sector: 512
sectors/track: 63
tracks/cylinder: 255
sectors/cylinder: 16065
cylinders: 1
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 11:38:52AM -0300, Friedrich Locke wrote:
> Hi folks.
>
> Does OBSD 6.2 support DELL H840 and DELL H740p raid controllers ?
No, but 6.3 will.
Hi folks.
Does OBSD 6.2 support DELL H840 and DELL H740p raid controllers ?
Thanks a lot.
theo wrote:
>
> Unfortunately we are still stuck here:
>
> 0. No code being developered, email and wiki discussion, gnashing of teeth
Seems par for the course these days. Blah blah, entitlement, whatnot,
and no work being done.
--zeur.
> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Stuart Henderson
> wrote:
> > What is not good is when you do have a RAID array, the controller is
> > in RAID mode, but OpenBSD doesn't understand the metadata, so it corrupts
> > data on the disk.
> >
> > This is a
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> What is not good is when you do have a RAID array, the controller is
> in RAID mode, but OpenBSD doesn't understand the metadata, so it corrupts
> data on the disk.
>
> This is a difficult area. We don't want
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 03:16:44AM +0300, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
> Boasty? I just try to help you to fix this bug by providing the
> information I've found. It's hard to fix it by myself because of the
> several times mentioned reasons. If you don't want to fix it just
> because you don't want I c
PM, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
> >>>> I think it's worth to be supported. The RAID mode of storage
> >>>> controller seems to be a default BIOS configuration in all modern
> >>>> desktop computers. I think most desktop users don't configure any r
Don't mind if I jump in.
"Rostislav Krasny" wrote:
>
> Boasty? I just try to help you to fix this bug by providing the
> information I've found. It's hard to fix it by myself because of the
> several times mentioned reasons. If you don't want to fix it just
> because you don't want I can live wit
t;> >> > us.
>> >> > That's how, collectively, we produce value, and popularity has nothing
>> >> > to
>> >> > do with it.
>> >>
>> >> I'm not familiar with the OpenBSD code and I even don't have a working
ly, we produce value, and popularity has nothing to
> >> > do with it.
> >>
> >> I'm not familiar with the OpenBSD code and I even don't have a working
> >> OpenBSD system to try fixing it by myself.
> >>
> >> I think you can easily ide
he mindset here is that if you really want something fixed in OpenBSD,
> >> > try to fix it yourself, and then try to share your fix with the rest of
> >> > us.
> >> > That's how, collectively, we produce value, and popularity has nothing to
> >> &
to fix it yourself, and then try to share your fix with the rest of us.
>> > That's how, collectively, we produce value, and popularity has nothing to
>> > do with it.
>>
>> I'm not familiar with the OpenBSD code and I even don't have a working
>> Ope
, and popularity has nothing to
> > do with it.
>
> I'm not familiar with the OpenBSD code and I even don't have a working
> OpenBSD system to try fixing it by myself.
>
> I think you can easily identify hard disks that are not part of any
> software RAID array
ing it by myself.
I think you can easily identify hard disks that are not part of any
software RAID array and support only them when the RAID mode is
enabled in BIOS. You can do it by looking for the 0xa92b4efc "Magic
Number" of the RAID superblock at the end of the disk and at 4K from
> On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:18:52AM +0300, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
> > You just lose users and popularity.
>
> In this community, your statement has the opposite effect of what it is
> trying to achieve. It puts developers off and discourages them from
> worrying about your problem.
>
> At any g
On Thu, Oct 12, 2017 at 12:18:52AM +0300, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
> You just lose users and popularity.
In this community, your statement has the opposite effect of what it is
trying to achieve. It puts developers off and discourages them from
worrying about your problem.
At any given moment, the
04:29 PM, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
>>>>> I think it's worth to be supported. The RAID mode of storage
>>>>> controller seems to be a default BIOS configuration in all modern
>>>>> desktop computers. I think most desktop users don't configure any
On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 7:01 PM, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017-10-11, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 6:28 AM, Eric Furman wrote:
>>> On Tue, Oct 10, 2017, at 04:29 PM, Rostislav Krasny wrote:
>>>> I think it's worth to be
1 - 100 of 1019 matches
Mail list logo
