From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Jun 29 16:09:50 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2352F1065680 for ; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 16:09:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sos@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from deepcore.dk (adsl.deepcore.dk [87.63.29.106]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B578FC14 for ; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 16:09:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sos@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from laptop.deepcore.dk (laptop.deepcore.dk [192.168.0.138]) by deepcore.dk (8.14.2/8.13.8) with ESMTP id m5TG9WKr075736; Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:09:35 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sos@FreeBSD.ORG) From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= To: Steven Hartland In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 References: <7d6fde3d0806260649t6619521bv92b65c472ddb7e1@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20080627170323.02591528@mail.computinginnovations.com> <7d6fde3d0806272057p795277a2ie60ac7d7d10f0a6e@mail.gmail.com> <7d6fde3d0806280129i31874960ofbc7627598e1426f@mail.gmail.com> <735A937C-89A9-411A-AA3F-377F576E635E@freebsd.org> <7d6fde3d0806280348r65875755pf7dc3917bba2bcb5@mail.gmail.com> <7d6fde3d0806280349j7eace513idb5cd81f9e2e4e0a@mail.gmail.com> <6.0.0.22.2.20080628132240.0255ba38@mail.computinginnovations.com> <7d6fde3d0806281410r781a6a77k98ffe237c10e3eee@mail.gmail.com> <7d6fde3d0806282011x472f8d27s955a8e1ab43a7341@mail.gmail.com> <48679898.3000905@clearchain.com> Message-Id: <43FD37E0-207A-4400-A95C-2301B5CD2B24@FreeBSD.ORG> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v924) Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 18:09:31 +0200 X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.924) Cc: Garrett Cooper , Benjamin Close , current@FreeBSD.ORG, Rainer Duffner Subject: Re: URGENT: Need help rebuilding iir RAID5 array with failed drive X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2008 16:09:50 -0000 On 29Jun, 2008, at 16:24 , Steven Hartland wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Benjamin Close" = > > >> Perhaps a lesson as developers we should take from this, is to put =20= >> a warning in ata about raid5. It's fooled Garret into believing he =20= >> had a raid5, how many others are also using ata believing their =20 >> raid5 is a raid5. We should warn people in the future rather than =20 >> just saying 'its in the docs'. A kernel warning at attach is much =20 >> more visible. > > Although it is more visible, personally I would prefer it to just fail > instead of proceeding. RAID5 is not RAID5 without parity so why even > allow it to continue and hence risk such an unrecoverable situation? Well, this has been rehashed many times before, it has been disabled, =20= put a warning in the boot log, warning in the docs, all 3 was the =20 favorite at the time it was done. I'm all ears for what the decision might be this time, just get =20 consensus and I'll flip the right switch. -S=F8ren