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

Writes to a raid spare???



Hi,

I use "lvm2 on software raid" on an opteron fileserver. The machine is
running the amd64 port but I don't think that is part of the problem. I
am simply wondering if anyone else has noticed that since it sounds
like a bug to me (as in bug vs feature).

Here is the setup:
kernel: Linux dax 2.6.15.4 (custom built)
> cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md0 : active raid1 sda1[0] sdc1[2](S) sdb1[1]
      96256 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md1 : active raid1 sda2[0] sdc2[2](S) sdb2[1]
      156143680 blocks [2/2] [UU]

md0 is the boot partition while md1 is the only lvm physical volume. sdc
is only used as a spare disk. sdd is a unit from an hardware raid controller,
it does not matter for the current problem.


The odd thing looks like that:
> iostat 1
...
avg-cpu:  %user   %nice    %sys %iowait   %idle
           0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00  100.00

Device:            tps   Blk_read/s   Blk_wrtn/s   Blk_read   Blk_wrtn
sda               3.00         0.00       144.00          0        144
sdb               3.00         0.00       144.00          0        144
sdc               2.00         0.00        16.00          0         16
md1               1.00         0.00       128.00          0        128
sdd               7.00         0.00        80.00          0         80
md0               0.00         0.00         0.00          0          0

...

As you can see there is a write to the spare disk (sdc). That is not
much, so I guess that this is only the event counter being updated. But
in my opinion, this is a problem. 

Why is this a problem? In this system, I do not expect a continous use
of the system drives, therefore I will see a start/stop cycle a few
times a day. This is fine but I bet that the motor will be the first
thing to fail on those drive, which is why I would like the hot spare to
be there. Now, if an event counter is incremented, the spare will also
spin up/spin down, and so likely break around the same time as the
others. My problem is then that I don't understand why a event counter
is needed on a spare disk, it is not supposed to be used unless
something goes wrong... Did I miss something?

thanks

jacques

PS: I know that a quick work around would be to completely disable the 
spin down timer on every drive, but that is only hidding the dust below 
the carpet.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: