Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 10:28:24 -0800 (PST) From: Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@ambrisko.com> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Scott Mitchell <scott+lists.freebsd@fishballoon.org>, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org, Vivek Khera <vivek@khera.org> Subject: Re: 6.0 on Dell 1850 with PERC4e/DC RAID? Message-ID: <200601131828.k0DISOoo088453@ambrisko.com> In-Reply-To: <200601131212.19465.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jung-uk Kim writes: | On Friday 13 January 2006 11:59 am, Doug Ambrisko wrote: | > Jung-uk Kim writes: | > | 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 | > | > | > <writeback,no-read-ahead,no-adaptative- io> 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? | > | > Running RAID 10, a drive was swapped and the rebuild started on the | > replacement drive. The rebuild complained about the source drive | > for the mirror rebuild having read errors that couldn't be | > recovered. It continued on and finished re-creating the mirror. | > Then the RAID proceeeded onto a background init which they normal | > did and started failing that and re-starting the background init | > over and over again. The box changed the RAID from degraded to | > optimal when the rebuild completed (with errors). Do a dd of the | > entire RAID logical device returned an error at the bad sector | > since it couldn't recover that. The RAID controller reported an I/O | > error and still left the RAID as optimal. | > | > We reported this and where told that's the way it is designed :-( | > Probably the spec. is defined by whatever the RAID controller | > happens to do versus what make sense :-( | > | > So far this has only happened once. Changing firmware did not | > help. | | Similar thing happened to me once or twice (with RAID5) and I thought | it was just a broken controller. If the culprit was design, it IS | really lame. :-( I'd suggest whining to them. To me "optimal" means "as far as I know there are no problems with the RAID". If enough customers whine they might change their view! Doug A.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200601131828.k0DISOoo088453>