Pasi Kärkkäinen wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 01:05:39AM +0100, Peter Kjellstrom wrote:
>> On Tuesday 12 January 2010, Les Mikesell wrote:
>>> On 1/12/2010 10:39 AM, Peter Kjellstrom wrote:
>> ...
>>>>>> ...that said, it's not much worse than the competetion, storage simply
>>>>>> sucks ;-(
>>>>> So you are saying people dole out huge amounts of money for rubbish?
>>>>> That the software raid people were and have always been right?
>>>> Nope, storage sucks, that includes the software ;-)
>>> If you can split the storage up into 2TB or smaller volumes that you can
>>> mount into sensible locations to spread the load and avoid contention
>>> you can always use software RAID1.
>> Funny you should mention software RAID1... I've seen two instances of that
>> getting silently out-of-sync and royally screwing things up beyond all
>> repair.
>>
>> Maybe this thread has gone on long enough now?
>>
>
> Not yet :)
>
> Please tell more about your hardware and software. What distro? What
> kernel? What disk controller? What disks?
>
> I'm interested in this because I have never seen Linux software MD RAID1
> failures like this, but some people keep telling they happen frequently..
It could be like Les said - bad RAM. I certainly have not encountered
this sort of error on a md raid1 array.
>
> I'm just wondering why I'm not seeing these failures, or if I've just
> been lucky so far..
>
Yeah, lucky you've not got bad RAM that passed POSTing and at the same
time did not bring your system down on you right from the start or
rendered it unstable.
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
