From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jul 23 20:42:48 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECD9C1065670 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:42:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scf@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mail.farley.org (mail.farley.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f0f:20:2::11]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8F278FC17 for ; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:42:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scf@FreeBSD.org) Received: from thor.farley.org (HPooka@thor.farley.org [IPv6:2001:470:1f0f:20:1::5]) by mail.farley.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n6NKglBr097142; Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:42:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from scf@FreeBSD.org) Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 15:42:47 -0500 (CDT) From: "Sean C. Farley" To: Bruce Simpson In-Reply-To: <4A68B2A0.8050509@incunabulum.net> Message-ID: References: <200901232244.n0NMiRmM098646@lurza.secnetix.de> <46acbb3e-71bc-4cff-93d7-59b48a1a9302@exchange01.ecp.noc> <4A68B2A0.8050509@incunabulum.net> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.2.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.5 (2008-06-10) on mail.farley.org Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ataraid's revenge! (Was: Re: A nasty ataraid experience.) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:42:49 -0000 On Thu, 23 Jul 2009, Bruce Simpson wrote: > 6 months on, ataraid(4) did it again. > > This time, I was lucky -- I caught in in time, but the damage to the > filesystem meant having to use fsdb to NULL out the affected inodes; > mounting read-only, tarring, and untarring across the network, after a > newfs, let me save the affected partition. > All I was doing at the time was srm'ing a few sensitive files; all > the processes wedged in WCHAN getblk. It seems ataraid(4) is not > robust against temporary drive/controller problems. The SMART logs on > the affected array drives all check out just fine, there are no bad > block remaps. > > So, time to either buy a hardware RAID controller, or move to ZFS... Out of fear of what ataraid may do to me especially with Intel MatrixRAID[1], I switched to using gmirror awhile back, and it has worked well. When I buy some new drives soon, I am considering using gvinum with 8.0, but I need to find out more. Anyone know if I can boot off of a gvinum partition and/or how it works (or does not) with various label schemes? Sean 1. http://wiki.freebsd.org/JeremyChadwick/ATA_issues_and_troubleshooting -- scf@FreeBSD.org