Thanks a lot Sanjeev!
If you look my first message you will see that discrepancy in zdb...
Leal.
[http://www.eall.com.br/blog]
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris
Marcelo,
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 02:17:37AM -0800, Marcelo Leal wrote:
> Thanks a lot Sanjeev!
> If you look my first message you will see that discrepancy in zdb...
Apologies. Now, in the hindsight I understand why you gave the zdb details :-(
I should have read the mail carefully.
Thanks and
Mattias Pantzare gmail.com> writes:
>
> He was talking about errors that the disk can't detect (errors
> introduced by other parts of the system, writes to the wrong sector or
> very bad luck). You can simulate that by writing diffrent data to the
> sector,
Well yes you can. Carsten and I are bo
hi richard,
the bugs database ... figures ... now that you said it, it's really
quite obvious :)
thanks, and thanks for the hint towards the drivers-discuss forum.
bye,
jay
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
zfs-discuss mailing list
zfs-
Ive studied all links here. But I want information of the HW raid controllers.
Not about ZFS, because I have plenty of ZFS information now. The closest thing
I got was
www.baarf.org
Where in one article he states that "raid5 never does parity check on reads".
Ive wrote that to the Linux guys. An
>Dear Admin
>u said:
>choose a 3-disk RAID-1 or a 4-disk RAID10
>set for tank over RAIDZ aWith a 3-disk mirror you'd have a disk left over
>to be hot spare for failure in either rpool or tank.
>why do u prefer raid1 with one spare rather than raidz?
>i heard raidz has better redundancy than raid 1
Orvar Korvar wrote:
> Ive studied all links here. But I want information of the HW raid
> controllers. Not about ZFS, because I have plenty of ZFS information now. The
> closest thing I got was
> www.baarf.org
>
[one of my favorite sites ;-)]
The problem is that there is no such thing as "har
There is a company (DataCore Software) that has been making / shipping
products for many years that I believe would help in this area. I've
used them before, they're very solid and have been leveraging the use of
commodity server and disk hardware to build massive storage arrays (FC &
iSCSI),
> "ca" == Carsten Aulbert writes:
> "ok" == Orvar Korvar writes:
ca> (using hdparm's utility makebadsector)
I haven't used that before, but it sounds like what you did may give
the RAID layer some extra information. If one of the disks reports
``read error---I have no idea what's s
> "db" == Dave Brown writes:
db> CRC/Checksum Error Detection In SANmelody and SANsymphony,
db> enhanced error detection can be provided by enabling Cyclic
db> Redundancy Check (CRC) [...] The CRC bits may
db> be added to either Data Digest, Header Digest, or both.
Thanks for
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 12:58 PM, Miles Nordin wrote:
> > "db" == Dave Brown writes:
>
>db> CRC/Checksum Error Detection In SANmelody and SANsymphony,
>db> enhanced error detection can be provided by enabling Cyclic
>db> Redundancy Check (CRC) [...] The CRC bits may
>db> be a
"The problem is that there is no such thing as "hardware RAID" there is
only "software RAID." The "HW RAID" controllers are processors
running software and the features of the product are therefore limited by
the software developer and processor capabilities. I goes without saying
that the proces
Happy new year!
Snowing here and my new year party was cancelled. Ok, let me do more boring IT
stuff then.
Orvar, sorry I misunderstood you.
Please feel free to explore the limitations of hardware RAID, and hopefully one
day you will come to a conclusion that -- it was invented for saving CPU ju
13 matches
Mail list logo
