On Dec 19, 2007 12:12 PM, David Brodbeck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Dec 19, 2007, at 4:50 AM, S Scharf wrote: > > > I am running a Debian 3.1 (Sarge) server with Raid 1 mirroring on > > the disk drive. > > > > Recently, one of the disks failed. The system sent root a proper e- > > mail notification of the failure. Unfortunately, > > the system seemed to continue to try to use the disk and operations > > slowed to the point that the only thing I could > > do was to power the system down and physically remove the bad drive. > > I had thought to check the mdadm status > > and remove the failed drive from the array by command. > > > > My question is shouldn't the Raid system have removed the drive for > > me after it had failed? Why was the system still > > trying to do operations on it after noticing the failure? Was (is) > > there something wrong with my raid configuration? > > Are these IDE drives? Were they on the same cable? IDE is kind of > "fragile" -- a bad drive can cause problems with accessing the other > drive on the same cable. Ideally you want the two drives in a RAID 1 > setup on separate cables -- this will give better performance, as well. > > The two drive are both IDE, the failed one shared the cable with the CD-ROM, (the CD-ROM was the master, the hard disk the slave) the good drive was on the other cable by itself ( as the master)
Stuart > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
