That raises a few issues... So what it needs is a feature where if a shutdown is dirty or a drive fails, it syncs? How do we know which drive is good to sync to/from? Can the md code be reused for this? Should we even bother? AFAICS the only benefit of ataraid over md is bootability (and compatibility with promise et al), but is that worth the work - maybe a dual disk grub + bios drive fallback is a better idea? And when ataraid kicks in with inconsistent disks, which data is it really using? If it's not checking/syncing ever (unless done manually), how redundant is it really - it's only taken on trust that the data is good. The previous reports of problems when a drive actually fails aren't very comforting either... I think I'm going back to md raid... >On Wed, 6 Nov 2002, Dave Stubbs wrote: >> >> Hence my question: does ataraid resync? Does it even know if there's a problem? > >AFAIK it does not. > >You can boot without ataraid, use one of the disks alone, changing its >contents and reboot with ataraid and it doesnt notice that the thing is >out of sync. And my system didnt even do anything after a full crash. > >If you know such things did happen, you should resync the disks manually.. > >Another solution i mentioned earlier in this list would be some kind of >"safe read" feature: if the system reads data from a raid1 array it should >read the data from both disks and compare it, so being able to detect any >sync problem > >But the master solution for now would be not to use ataraid at all, >and instead use linux software raid >If you do, you will have more swapspace :-) > >Viele Grüsse, >Thorsten
