[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RAID Support?

Michael Hicks wrote:
> David Morris <lists@morris-clan.net> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks for all the responses, sounds very encouraging...now all I need is
> > to get the hardware and experiment (software RAID, BTW).
> >
> > Anyone have any experience with the 2.4 kernel and raid on sparcs?
> We have an Ultra 30 (UltraSparc) with three 9GB drives running software
> raid-0.  That partition is used as temporary space for amanda backup files,
> so I wanted fast access.  It manages to pull off a 30MB/s transfer rate,
> which seems pretty good to me considering the age of the drives, but it
> might not be all that great in the grand scheme of things.
> I'm not sure if this is still a problem, but when I started, I was forced
> to access the raw drives, rather than using partitions (ie, /dev/hdb
> instead of /dev/hdb1).  The partition maps on the second and third drives
> would get toasted if I didn't do that.  I've heard that accessing the whole
> disk this way is required if you only have one big partition on the disk,
> and that disks with multiple partitions should be safe, but I don't really
> want to test it ;-)

It's news to me that it ever started working.  I had a two disk SS20 and
was not using the whole disk for the raid partitions, only about half. 
I was using the other parts of the disks for other things.  It all
worked just peachy until you rebooted, and then the disk label on the
second disk was always gone.  I never heard that this was ever fixed.  I
never got 2.4.x to work on the machine either, at least, not too
reliably, as it has 512MB of mem and dual processors.  This seemed to
hose just about everything I tried.  A couple of people's patched kernel
sources for 2.4 would work, but with just one processor and usually only
if I took out about half the memory.


Reply to: