Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:40:01 GMT From: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/166589: atacontrol(8) incorrectly treats RAID10 and 0+1 the same Message-ID: <201301151640.r0FGe1pG044843@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR bin/166589; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> To: Allen Landsidel <landsidel.allen@gmail.com> Cc: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: bin/166589: atacontrol(8) incorrectly treats RAID10 and 0+1 the same Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 18:35:43 +0200 Please, be my guest to show me where atacontrol(8) controls any hardware RAID controller, or anything except ataraid(4) at all. On 15.01.2013 18:26, Allen Landsidel wrote: > The PR is about hardware raid controllers and their interface with > atacontrol, not ataraid. > > On 1/15/2013 11:25, Alexander Motin wrote: >> At what point have we talked about hardware RAID controllers? ataraid(8) >> never controller hardware RAID controllers, but only Soft-/Fake-RAIDs >> implemented by board BIOS'es during boot and OS drivers after that. >> >> On 15.01.2013 18:22, Allen Landsidel wrote: >>> Your solution then is to require everyone use software raid on their >>> hardware raid controllers? >>> >>> On 1/15/2013 11:20, Alexander Motin wrote: >>>> On 15.01.2013 18:03, Allen Landsidel wrote: >>>>> I'm also extremely interested to hear how you intend to "handle it as >>>>> RAID10 at the OS level" since that is, in fact, impossible. >>>> Easily! >>>> >>>>> If it's a RAID0+1 in the controller, than it's a RAID0+1. Period. The >>>>> OS can't do anything about it. A single disk failure is still >>>>> knocking >>>>> half the array offline (the entire failed RAID-0) and you are left >>>>> with >>>>> a functioning RAID-0 with no redundancy at all. >>>> ataraid(8) in question (and its new alternative graid(8)) controls >>>> software RAIDs. It means that I can do anything I want in software as >>>> long as it fits into existing on-disk metadata format. If RAID BIOS >>>> wants to believe that two failed disks of four always mean failed array >>>> -- it is their decision I can't change. But after OS booted nothing >>>> will >>>> prevent me from accessing still available data replicas. >>>> >>>>> On >> > -- Alexander Motin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201301151640.r0FGe1pG044843>