From owner-freebsd-geom@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 25 09:46:50 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C981065670 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 09:46:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from areilly@bigpond.net.au) Received: from nskntqsrv02p.mx.bigpond.com (nskntqsrv02p.mx.bigpond.com [61.9.168.234]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BEB08FC22 for ; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 09:46:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com ([124.188.161.100]) by nskntmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20100425080125.JLNK4632.nskntmtas02p.mx.bigpond.com@nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com>; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 08:01:25 +0000 Received: from duncan.reilly.home ([124.188.161.100]) by nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP id <20100425080125.FQUN1945.nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com@duncan.reilly.home>; Sun, 25 Apr 2010 08:01:25 +0000 Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 18:01:25 +1000 From: Andrew Reilly To: Marius Strobl Message-ID: <20100425080125.GA12283@duncan.reilly.home> References: <4BD06BD9.6030401@FreeBSD.org> <20100424193034.GA9853@alchemy.franken.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100424193034.GA9853@alchemy.franken.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-Authentication-Info: Submitted using SMTP AUTH LOGIN at nskntotgx01p.mx.bigpond.com from [124.188.161.100] using ID areilly@bigpond.net.au at Sun, 25 Apr 2010 08:01:25 +0000 X-RPD-ScanID: Class unknown; VirusThreatLevel unknown, RefID str=0001.0A150203.4BD3F6D5.00BD,ss=1,fgs=0 X-SIH-MSG-ID: rBEzFdb2TAD0zmQs0WyzOwJxyArnqyN48Z4QX81loRIGTUDCp8DeQ9rANv1RsM6kxDxJJhqNNGEhaa7hTY3Rs9mK Cc: Alexander Motin , FreeBSD-Current , freebsd-geom@freebsd.org Subject: usb/da vs sata geometry calculations (was Re: Switchover to CAM ATA?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-geom@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: GEOM-specific discussions and implementations List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 25 Apr 2010 09:46:50 -0000 Hi all, Sorry to interrupt this thread with an off-topic question, but it seems vaguely related, and you folk seem to be the right ones to ask: I've recently done a drive upgrade in a 1U rack machine that only had space for the two active drives that were in it, and I couldn't afford the down-time that it would take to install from scratch. So I formatted and populated the first replacement drive in an external USB cradle, and when it was looking like a good replacement for the (gmirror'd) image that was running, I did the physical swap, and all was good, as expected. All except that that the identical drive that I inserted as the second element of the mirror would *not* accept a copy of the first disk's MBR block (with fdisk). It said that the calculated geometry was incompatible. Luckily for me (I think) the calculated geometry was a megabyte or so *larger* than the first drive, so I was still able to bsdlabel it to match, and slot it into the gmirror as planned. Was this the result of the umass/da driver having a different synthetic geometry calculation routine than the SATA driver? This was all on an 8-STABLE system about 400 days old, fwiw. Should I expect any on-going badness as a result of this difference in "geometry" between two identical drives? Cheers, -- Andrew