Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 20:05:31 +0100 From: Matthias Schuendehuette <msch@snafu.de> To: secmgr <security@jim-liesl.org> Cc: Lukas Ertl <le@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: freebsd 5.3 have any problem with vinum ? Message-ID: <200411112005.31694.msch@snafu.de> In-Reply-To: <4192889E.8010506@jim-liesl.org> References: <02f201c4ba91$f9f95db0$33017f80@psique> <200411071042.03382.msch@snafu.de> <4192889E.8010506@jim-liesl.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Am Mittwoch, 10. November 2004 22:31 schrieben Sie: > ok, your instructions worked like a charm. So i'm running my nice 4 > member SCSI gvinum raid5 array (with softupdates turned on), and it's > zipping along. Fine! :-) > Now I need to test just how robust this is. Ouhh... ;-) > camcontrol is too nice. I want to test a more real world failure. > I'm running dbench and just pull one of the drives. My expectation > is that I should see a minor pause, and then the array continue in > some slower, degraded mode. That was mine too... > What I get is a kernel trap 12 (boom!). > I reboot, and it will not mount the degraded set till I replace the > drive. > > I turned off softupdates, and had the same thing happen. Is this a > bogus test? Is it reasonable to expect that a scsi drive failure > should of been tolerated w/o crashing? No, of course not. I have more or less the same problems here. Once I came so far as to delete the crashed subdisk but when I tried to delete the (not existing anymore) vinumdrive, my kernel also crashed... Well, to be honest, I once tried to pull the plug on one of my disks with 'classic' vinum and I got a kernel panic as well. OK, this happened a few years ago and I never tried that again... I'm not sure if this is a problem of (g)vinum or if FreeBSD has other problems in this area. And we all have to consider that gvinum is in a relatively early development phase (IMHO) - it is basically working, that is, it's possible to continue an existing 'classic' vinum installation with gvinum but it's still not fully functional in all depth. But I think, there's all the potential to get there. I have the impression that Lukas is *very* interested in his baby and I have a good overall feeling so far. But he's the only one developing gvinum AFAIK... And - my primary interest is the LVM functionality of (g)vinum. IMHO if you *really* have valuable data to protect, you can afford a hardware RAID-controller (*and* a tape drive :-). Anything else is wrong economy. But the current disk layout possibilities with up to four slices and at max 28 BSD-partitions are far to inflexible for todays large disks. So from this point of view I'm already fairly happy with gvinum as it is today. Which doesn't mean that I'm not trying to help to get gvinum to the place and state where it deserves to be... :-) -- Ciao/BSD - Matthias Matthias Schuendehuette <msch [at] snafu.de>, Berlin (Germany) PGP-Key at <pgp.mit.edu> and <wwwkeys.de.pgp.net> ID: 0xDDFB0A5F
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200411112005.31694.msch>