From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 13 01:21:46 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C795316A41F for ; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:21:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) Received: from anuket.mj.niksun.com (gwnew.niksun.com [65.115.46.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2556243D48 for ; Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:21:45 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) Received: from niksun.com (anuket [10.70.0.5]) by anuket.mj.niksun.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k0D1LBqb034952; Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:21:11 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org) From: Jung-uk Kim To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 20:20:55 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <200601130041.k0D0fHOg032877@ambrisko.com> In-Reply-To: <200601130041.k0D0fHOg032877@ambrisko.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="euc-kr" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200601122020.59843.jkim@FreeBSD.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV devel-20050919/1239/Thu Jan 12 06:36:22 2006 on anuket.mj.niksun.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: Scott Mitchell , Vivek Khera Subject: Re: 6.0 on Dell 1850 with PERC4e/DC RAID? 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: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 01:21:46 -0000 On Thursday 12 January 2006 07:41 pm, Doug Ambrisko wrote: > Scott Mitchell writes: > | > I did find a program > | > posted to one of the freebsd lists called 'amrstat' that I run > | > nightly. It produces this kind of output: > | > > | > Drive 0: 68.24 GB, RAID1 > | > optimal > | > > | > If it says "degraded" it is time to fix a drive. You just > | > fire up the lsi megaraid tools and find out which drive it is. > > This is probably a faily good scheme. Caveat is that you can have > a "optimal" RAID that is broken :-( That's lame. Under what condition does it happen, do you know? Thanks, Jung-uk Kim