From owner-freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 11 18:59:10 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Delivered-To: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1831216A41F for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:59:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tonix@interazioni.it) Received: from smtp.ufficiopostale.it (servizi.interazioni.it [194.183.4.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5465043D49 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:59:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from tonix@interazioni.it) Received: (qmail 22348 invoked by uid 85); 11 Sep 2005 18:59:06 -0000 Received: from tonix@interazioni.it by avsmtp.ufficiopostale.it by uid 88 with qmail-scanner-1.12 (nod32: 1.1213 (20050909)/. Clear:. Processed in 0.200379 secs); 11 Sep 2005 18:59:06 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Mail-From: tonix@interazioni.it via avsmtp.ufficiopostale.it X-Qmail-Scanner: 1.12 (Clear:. Processed in 0.200379 secs) Received: from unknown (HELO IATonino.interazioni.it) (tonix@interazioni.it@213.233.2.94) by relay.interazioni.net with SMTP; 11 Sep 2005 18:59:06 -0000 Message-Id: <6.2.3.4.0.20050911192854.04db7b90@pop.ufficiopostale.it> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.3.4 Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 19:56:08 +0100 To: freebsd-scsi@FreeBSD.ORG From: "tonix (Antonio Nati)" In-Reply-To: <20050909135705.O84118@sasami.jurai.net> References: <6.2.3.4.0.20050901172618.0532ecb0@pop.ufficiopostale.it> <20050906084747.A84118@sasami.jurai.net> <6.2.3.4.0.20050907153854.04c36bc8@pop.ufficiopostale.it> <6.2.3.4.0.20050907163520.05554a30@pop.ufficiopostale.it> <6.2.3.4.0.20050907164953.0548c070@pop.ufficiopostale.it> <20050907133856.C84118@sasami.jurai.net> <6.2.3.4.0.20050909120032.053cc160@pop.ufficiopostale.it> <20050909135705.O84118@sasami.jurai.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Subject: Re: IDAD0 rebuilding (was: Re: camcontrol and IDAD0) X-BeenThere: freebsd-scsi@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: SCSI subsystem List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 18:59:10 -0000 At 18.58 09/09/2005, Matthew N. Dodd wrote: >On Fri, 9 Sep 2005, tonix (Antonio Nati) wrote: >>Finally, these controllers seems to be unusable in a production >>environment with FreeBSD. > >I don't think anyone has really tested rebuilding a volume while the >system is running. > >I'd be interested in the results of changing the definition of >IDA_QCB_MAX from 256 to 128. > >See sys/dev/ida/idavar.h: > > #define IDA_QCB_MAX 256 With IDA_QCB_MAX => 128; processes working process 1 -> tar of whole disk to file, then gzip file, then delete file process 2 -> rebuild world process 3 -> every ten second "idacontrol show" action: during these jobs, I extract one disk, wait 20 seconds and insert it again observing until rebuilding has finished. With DL360 G1 2x933 CPU and Integrated Smart Array, RAID = 1 (2 x 18GB disks) No problems with controller rebuilding priority on every level (low, medium, high) idacontrol always shows correct status and percent of rebuilding still to be done Only some console logs like "ida_command: out of QCBs" When disk is removed or inserted great bunchs of soft errors. A lot of soft errors every time "idacontrol show" is run. With DL580 G1 4x700 CPU and Integrated Smart Array, RAID = 0+1 (4 x 36GB disks) Systems never hangs but rebuilding does not work (apparently). When reinserting the extracted disk, rebuild does not start until I run "idacontrol recover". After running this command, rebuilding seem extremely slow, and after a few minutes status of RAID set turns to "interim". Again "idacontrol recover" and again "interim" after a few minutes. Display of rebuilding missing start from 50% (as only one disk of two must be rebuilded). With DL580 G1 4x700 CPU and Integrated Smart Array, RAID = 5 (3+1 x 9GB disks) When Smart Array is initializating the RAID 5 set, bootstrap says Smart Arrays is yet optimizing datas, while idacontrol says arrays is OK. Who to trust? Still to test rebuilding with processes doing I/O. Tonino >-- >10 40 80 C0 00 FF FF FF FF C0 00 00 00 00 10 AA AA 03 00 00 00 08 00