From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jan 31 03:29:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F05A016A4CE; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 03:29:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from spider.deepcore.dk (cpe.atm2-0-53484.0x50a6c9a6.abnxx9.customer.tele.dk [80.166.201.166]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6012943D39; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 03:29:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sos@DeepCore.dk) Received: from DeepCore.dk (sos.deepcore.dk [194.192.25.130]) by spider.deepcore.dk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i0VBQXCm083750; Sat, 31 Jan 2004 12:26:33 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from sos@DeepCore.dk) Message-ID: <401B9147.3010400@DeepCore.dk> Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 12:28:07 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?S=F8ren_Schmidt?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20040126 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: obrien@freebsd.org References: <40119E16.1010802@FreeBSDsystems.COM> <20040131082216.GG18624@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <20040131082216.GG18624@dragon.nuxi.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-mail-scanned: by DeepCore Virus & Spam killer v1.3 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 05:11:53 -0800 cc: Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav cc: Julian Elischer cc: Lanny Baron cc: FreeBSD current users Subject: Re: ata0-raid oddness. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 11:29:19 -0000 David O'Brien wrote: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 12:27:07AM +0100, Dag-Erling Sm?rgrav wrote: > >>Lanny Baron writes: >> >>>That is correct. ad0 and ad1 are subdisks of respective ar* >> >>it is *not* correct - ad0 and ad1 should not be shown when they are >>members of an active array, as any attempt to partition and label them >>directly is likely to corrupt the array. > > > older ATA didn't show the members of an active array. ATAng started > showing them. :-( I asked sos about it and he said they'ed be exposed > for a while until he finished some things he was working on. > > Maybe sos can update us on the state of things and the plans. Real old ATA (4.x) showed them and when they left in preATAng there was lots of complaining. I see that now we are back to the old (initial) behavior complains are showing up again :/ There are problems like what to do with disks that contains a valid RAID config but that RAID cannot be completed and used, how are such disks supposed to show up ? Anyhow the ataraid code was about to change, but then hope started to show again that we could loose ccd/vinum/raidframe/ataraid and get one proper GEOM implementation, that would make life perfect (about RAID at least) so I've put further work on ataraid on the backburner since I dont want duplicate work in there (we have PLENTY of that already).... However since some of our worst armchair generals and whiners are involved in this, I dont expect an outcome soon, if any at all ;) -- -Søren