On Tue, Sep 04, 2012 at 01:41:42PM -0400, Brian Foster wrote: > To follow up on this, I ran this workload for a couple days without a > problem. I was able to configure a bunch of single disk raid0 volumes to > put into an md raid0, so I'm testing that next. And I've also run this workload on another test box here over a week and not been able to reproduce the problem :-( > If you do happen to reproduce the problem again, I would reiterate the > suggestion to append that blocked task data to the thread over on the > xfs list (re: my last post, it looks like some data was missing..?) Yes, sorry I haven't had time to dig around for the data until now. The message in question was http://oss.sgi.com/pipermail/xfs/2012-May/019472.html and it turns out I had attached a truncated version of dmesg. The full one is attached here. Now: I should say it's not too late for us to ditch the LSI controllers, so perhaps it's time for me to ask a different question. Does somebody know a good controller card (or cards) which will let us connect 24 SATA drives into a Linux server in a rock-solid manner? I am open to solutions which provide RAID on the controller card, and also to HBAs which require software RAID. It does need to be SATA because we are looking at getting maximum volumes of archive data stored at minimum cost, using 3 or 4TB drives. Read/write performance is not important. However there will be times when we hammer the array hard, doing bulk imports or reads of data, so the controller needs to work happily under those conditions. Thanks, Brian. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: storage3-sysreq.txt.gz Type: application/x-gunzip Size: 28530 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/attachments/20120909/c2e45566/attachment-0001.bin>
