On 04/19/12 14:20, Mike Diehl wrote:
>
> My question is, "which one?" Usually I get a [UU] on a good RAID, and an _
> for the failed drive. That would indicate that sda3 has failed. However,
> sdb3 is marked with an (F), which I've never seen before.
>
> Which drive should I replace?
You
On 19-Apr-12 20:20, Mike Diehl wrote:
Personalities : [linear] [raid0] [raid1] [raid10] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
md1 : active raid1 sdb1[1] sda1[0]
112320 blocks [2/2] [UU]
md3 : active raid1 sdb3[2](F) sda3[0]
308255104 blocks [2/1] [U_]
My question is, "which one?" Usually I g
Richard Fish wrote:
> Glad you got it working. If the kernel config is truly the same,
> then I suspect you got an updated version of baselayout or udev
> that fixed it.
Yes, you are right. Baselayout which is on 2005.0 install-cd must
have some bug, which I eliminated during network-install by
And this will teach me to scan all messages in a thread before I start
replying!!!
Glad you got it working. If the kernel config is truly the same, then I
suspect you got an updated version of baselayout or udev that fixed it.
-Richard
Jarry wrote:
>
>> In the meantime I'm trying to update my
Jarry wrote:
>> In the maintenance mode, does /sys/block/md0/* exist? What does "cat
>> /proc/mdstat" report?
>
>
Actually, if the kernel autodetection runs at boot time, /proc/mdstat
should show the devices regardless of whether the device nodes exist or
notso something is a bit strange wit
Mike Williams wrote:
>On Wednesday 13 July 2005 15:09, Jarry wrote:
>
>
>>It seems (or at least it is discussed there) that this (udev does not
>>create /dev/md* at startup) is some kernel-bug! If some of our kernel
>>developers is watching this list, could he confirm or refuse it?
>>Can I someh
In the meantime I'm trying to update my system to 2.6.12-r4
(up to now I used 2.6.11-r3 from 2005.0 universal installation cd)...
Actually, I did not updated the system, but installed once more.
This time as a "network installation", with latest portage and
stage1 downloaded from some mirror-s
On Wednesday 13 July 2005 15:09, Jarry wrote:
> It seems (or at least it is discussed there) that this (udev does not
> create /dev/md* at startup) is some kernel-bug! If some of our kernel
> developers is watching this list, could he confirm or refuse it?
> Can I somehow get rid of udev, when it i
Richard Fish wrote:
In short, if you don't really know what initramfs is, you are probably
not using it! So I am not sure why you are having this problem.
Neither am I. I already installed a couple of servers with full raid1
using various distros (RedHat, Caldera, Debian), now I'm trying
Gento
Jarry wrote:
> Richard Fish wrote:
>
> > Just an FYI, the md driver does not create sysfs entries and thus udev
> > does not create device nodes if autodetection is not performed by the
> > driver. Autodetection is not performed if either:
> >
> > 1. The md driver is a module (not a problem accor
A. Khattri wrote:
Some motherboards claim to have RAID built-in but really it is software
RAID in the BIOS.
OK, now I understand. I call it "pseudo-hw-raid". It still depends on
software driver and cpu.
Linux's software RAID is usually better though.
I agree. And that is what I'm trying to
A. Khattri wrote:
>On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Jarry wrote:
>
>
>
>>Pardon for my ignorance, but what do you mean with "Linux raid-1 rather
>>than the software raid"??? Is it not the same? Or do you mean some
>>hw-raid?
>>
>>
>
>Some motherboards claim to have RAID built-in but really it is softwar
On Tue, 12 Jul 2005, Jarry wrote:
> Pardon for my ignorance, but what do you mean with "Linux raid-1 rather
> than the software raid"??? Is it not the same? Or do you mean some
> hw-raid?
Some motherboards claim to have RAID built-in but really it is software
RAID in the BIOS. Linux's software RA
Kurt Guenther wrote:
I did a similar setup, but I used Linux raid-1 rather then the software
raid.
Pardon for my ignorance, but what do you mean with "Linux raid-1 rather
than the software raid"??? Is it not the same? Or do you mean some
hw-raid?
BTW, I'm already on the track of my problem:
Af
I did a similar setup, but I used Linux raid-1 rather then the software
raid.
If I remember right, I tried the software raid, but I think you made it
further then I did. I couldn't get the software raid working under the
live CD.
Sorry, no help other then to recommend Linux raid instead of the
15 matches
Mail list logo
