[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091121170355.7540d169@mjolnir.ossman.eu>
Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2009 17:03:55 +0100
From: Pierre Ossman <pierre-list@...man.eu>
To: neilb@...e.de
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Raid not shutting down when disks are lost?
Neil?
On Thu, 8 Oct 2009 16:39:52 +0200
Pierre Ossman <pierre-list@...man.eu> wrote:
> Today one RAID6 array I manage decided to lose four out of eight disks.
> Oddly enough, the array did not shut down but instead I got
> intermittent read and writer errors from the filesystem.
>
> It's been some time since I had a failure of this magnitude, but I seem
> to recall that once the array lost too many disks, it would shut down
> and refuse to write a single byte. The nice effect of this was that if
> it was a temporary error, you could just reboot and the array would
> start nicely (albeit in degraded mode).
>
> Has something changed? Is this perhaps an effect of using RAID6 (I used
> to run RAID5 arrays)? Or was I simply lucky the previous instances I've
> had?
>
> Related, it would be nice if you could control how it handles lost
> disks. E.g. I'd like it to go read-only when it goes in to fully
> degraded mode. In case the last disk lost was only a temporary glitch,
> the array could be made to recover without a lengthy resync.
>
> Rgds
--
-- Pierre Ossman
WARNING: This correspondence is being monitored by FRA, a
Swedish intelligence agency. Make sure your server uses
encryption for SMTP traffic and consider using PGP for
end-to-end encryption.
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists