From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Jun 21 18:32:39 2011 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 D9B041065686 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:32:39 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ambrisko@ambrisko.com) Received: from mail.ambrisko.com (mail.ambrisko.com [64.174.51.43]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2808FC15 for ; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:32:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Ambrisko-Me: Yes Received: from server2.ambrisko.com (HELO internal.ambrisko.com) ([192.168.1.2]) by ironport.ambrisko.com with ESMTP; 21 Jun 2011 11:04:12 -0700 Received: from ambrisko.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by internal.ambrisko.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p5LI3ZxW039890; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:03:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ambrisko@ambrisko.com) Received: (from ambrisko@localhost) by ambrisko.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Submit) id p5LI3ZpE039889; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:03:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ambrisko) From: Doug Ambrisko Message-Id: <201106211803.p5LI3ZpE039889@ambrisko.com> In-Reply-To: <20110618005124.GA43568@icarus.home.lan> To: Jeremy Chadwick Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:03:35 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL124d (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: MFC: graid(8) (RAID GEOM) support 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: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 18:32:39 -0000 Jeremy Chadwick writes: | Sorry for the cross-post, but I thought both lists would want to know | about this. | | Looks like mav@ just committed this ~17 hours ago: | http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/geom/raid/g_raid.c | | Those who have historically wanted to use Intel MatrixRAID (now called | Intel RST (Rapid Storage Technology)), but haven't due to the severe | issues/risks with ataraid(4), will probably be very interested in | this commit. I know I am! | | I plan on stress-testing the Intel support on a 2-disk system with | RAID-1 enabled, and will document my experiences, procedures, etc... We definitely want people to help test this out. It was designed from the start to be robust and do recovery for RAID 1 which is our use. We had previously hacked enhanced support into ataraid(4) and ata(4) for use in-house. Doug A.