Re: raid10 is killing me, and applications that aren't willing towait for it to respond
On 12/13/23 11:51, Pocket wrote:
On 12/13/23 10:26, gene heskett wrote:
Greetings all;
I thought I was doing things right a year back when I built a raid10
for my /home partition. but I'm tired of fighting with it for access.
Anything that wants to open a file on it, is subjected to a freeze of
at least 30 seconds BEFORE the file requester is drawn on screen. Once
it has done the screen draw and the path is established, read/writes
then proceed at multi-gigabyte speeds just like it should, but some
applications refuse to wait that long, so digiKam cannot import from
my camera for example one, QIDISlicer is another that get plumb upset
and declares a segfault, core dumped, but it can't write the core dump
for the same reason it declared a segfault. Here is a copy/paste of
the last attempt to select the "device" tab in QIDISlicer:
-----------------------------------------------
Error creating proxy: Error calling StartServiceByName for
org.gtk.vfs.GPhoto2VolumeMonitor: Timeout was reached
(g-io-error-quark, 24)
** (qidi-slicer:389574): CRITICAL **: 04:55:46.975: Cannot register
URI scheme wxfs more than once
** (qidi-slicer:389574): CRITICAL **: 04:55:46.975: Cannot register
URI scheme memory more than once
(qidi-slicer:389574): Gtk-CRITICAL **: 04:55:47.084:
gtk_box_gadget_distribute: assertion 'size >= 0' failed in GtkScrollbar
[2023-12-13 05:10:27.325222] [0x00007f77e6ffd6c0] [error] Socket
created. Multicast: 255.255.255.255. Interface: 192.168.71.3
Unhandled unknown exception; terminating the application.
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
-----------------------------------------------------
This where it was attempting to open the cache buffers if needed to
remember what moonraker, a web server driver which is part of the
klipper install on the printer, addressed at 192.168.71.110: with an
odd, high numbered port above 10,000.
I've been here several times with this problem without any
constructive responses other than strace, which of course does NOT
work for network stuff, and would if my past history with it is any
indication, generate several terabytes of output, but it fails for the
same reason, no place to put its output because I assume, it can't
write to the raid10 in a timely manner.
So one more time: Why can't I use my software raid10 on 4 1T SSD's ?????
Cheers, Gene Heskett.
I gave up using raid many years ago and I used the extra drives as backups.
So why did you give up? Must have been a reason.
Wrote a script to rsync /home to the backup drives.
Cheers, Gene Heskett.
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
- Louis D. Brandeis
Reply to: