I'm not sure if my question was sent properly last time, so I'm resending :) Is it true that if in the middle of a RAID i/o, one of the disks fail, dmevent doesn't actually change the metadata at all? My experiment procedure is listed below. Perhaps I did something wrong? Thanks for clarifying, Sandra -----Original Message----- From: Sandra Escandor Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 1:46 PM To: 'ATARAID (eg, Promise Fasttrak,Highpoint 370) related discussions' Subject: RE: experimenting with dmraid - disk status Ok, I've set it up so that I transfer a large file onto the RAID, and then during the transfer, I pull out a member disk to simulate a disk failure. I would like to confirm if I should be seeing what I'm seeing: -The output of "dmraid -n" shows disk[0].status: 0x53a for all of the disks, even the one pulled out. I expected dmeventd to change one of them, since I'm doing I/O as you had mentioned. Is what I was expecting incorrect? -The output of "dmraid -n" shows isw_dev[0].vol.map[0].failed_disk_num: 255. I expected this to be the number of the disk that I have removed. Is what I am expecting for this field incorrect? I do see that dmsetup and dm_dso_reg_tool give the proper output (as mentioned in the document "How to Guide: DMRAID Eventing - What To Expect"), so that's good. So, does this mean that dmeventd doesn't modify the metadata at all as what I had expected above? Thanks, Sandra -----Original Message----- From: ataraid-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ataraid-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Heinz Mauelshagen Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 8:46 AM To: ATARAID (eg, Promise Fasttrak, Highpoint 370) related discussions Subject: RE: experimenting with dmraid - disk status On Tue, 2011-05-03 at 07:58 -0400, Sandra Escandor wrote: > So, if I understood what you have said correctly, then the following > would be true: > > - When there is no I/O being performed on the RAID, and then one of the > member disks becomes disconnected for some reason, then a dmeventd event > would not be generated. Correct. > - After a while, I/O does get performed on the RAID (with a member disk > disconnected), then that will be the time that a dmeventd event gets > generated. Correct. Any generated events are being based on io, not on _any_ other events such as unplugging a drive. Heinz > > Is that right? > > -----Original Message----- > From: ataraid-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:ataraid-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Heinz Mauelshagen > Sent: Monday, May 02, 2011 4:53 PM > To: ATARAID (eg, Promise Fasttrak, Highpoint 370) related discussions > Subject: RE: experimenting with dmraid - disk status > > On Mon, 2011-05-02 at 15:19 -0400, Sandra Escandor wrote: > > After I installed the dmeventd package, I notice the following: > > (general setup: ICH10R controller, raid0+1, 4 member disks) > > - When I pull out a drive, then run dm_dso_reg_tool -m, the section > > "Error Events Recorded by Kernel" for the superset and two subsets are > > still 0. Is this expected? > > Unless you performed io on the set. > > > - (Drive still physically disconnected) when I run dmraid -n, the > > metadata shows that the status of the disk that I pulled out still has > > the same status as the other disks which are plugged in (i.e > > disk[0].status: 0x53a is shown for all of the disks, even the one that > > I pulled out). > > Same as above. > > Heinz > > > > > The steps that I took to set up the device mapper raid event > monitoring > > are basically the same as the one found in: "How to Setup Device > Mapper > > Raid event Monitoring_0.74.pdf" > > (http://sources.redhat.com/lvm2/wiki/DMRAID_Eventing) > > EXCEPT: > > * I obtained the dmeventd package from the Ubuntu repository > (Maverick) > > * I didn't install the patch (since I'm using kernel 2.6.35) > > * I changed the makefile of libdmraid-events so that it would link > with > > the pthread library (i.e added -lpthread to the makefile). > > > > Is there another package that I need to install, or have I not set > this > > up properly? > > > > Thanks for the clarifications, > > Sandra > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Heinz Mauelshagen [mailto:heinzm@xxxxxxxxxx] > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 10:14 AM > > To: Sandra Escandor > > Subject: RE: experimenting with dmraid - disk status > > > > On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 08:00 -0400, Sandra Escandor wrote: > > > I forgot to mention my metadata type. Yes, I'm using Intel software > > raid > > > (so it's in isw format). Where would I be able to get this plugin? > > > > You should get them with any distros dmraid-events package. > > > > Heinz > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Sandra > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: ataraid-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx > > > [mailto:ataraid-list-bounces@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Heinz > > Mauelshagen > > > Sent: Friday, April 29, 2011 3:58 AM > > > To: ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > > Subject: Re: experimenting with dmraid - disk status > > > > > > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 09:30 -0400, Sandra Escandor wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was doing a bit of experimenting with dmraid. What I have done > is > > to > > > > create a raid0+1 array, and then physically pull one of the disks > > out. > > > > I then use the command "dmraid -n" to look at the metadata on the > > > > member disks. I notice that the member disk listed by the output > > that > > > > has the specific serial number of the disk that I pulled, whose > > status > > > > I expect to be different from the other disks listed, still has > the > > > > same status as the other still physically plugged in. (i.e > > > > disk[0].status: 0x53a is shown for all of the disks, even the one > > that > > > > I pulled out). Is this normal? > > > > > > Yes, unless it's isw format, where a plugin exists to update the > > > metadata. > > > > > > Heinz > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The following is the output of "dmraid -V": > > > > > > > > dmraid version: 1.0.0.rc16 (2009.09.16) shared > > > > > > > > dmraid library version: 1.0.0.rc16 (2009.09.16) > > > > > > > > device-mapper version: 4.13.0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for clarifying, > > > > > > > > Sandra > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Ataraid-list mailing list > > > > Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Ataraid-list mailing list > > > Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Ataraid-list mailing list > > Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx > > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list > > > _______________________________________________ > Ataraid-list mailing list > Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list > > _______________________________________________ > Ataraid-list mailing list > Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list _______________________________________________ Ataraid-list mailing list Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list _______________________________________________ Ataraid-list mailing list Ataraid-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/ataraid-list
