On Monday February 4, rw@firstpr.com.au wrote: > Junaid Rizvi wrote: > > > What about mdctl --monitor ? > ,, > After searching this mailing list, I found that mdctl lives about 1000 > km from here: That would put you in ... Melbourne? > > I would like a way of ensuring the report system really works, without > actually having a RAID failure. I suppose I could doctor the source to > achieve this. Looking at Monitor.c, it does not yet add anything to > the system logs if there is a failure. No, that's the /* FIXME log the event to syslog maybe */ bit... > if we detect an array with active<raid and spare==0 > we look at other arrays that have same spare-group > If we find one with active==raid and spare>0, > and if we can get_disk_info and find a name > Then we hot-remove and hot-add to the other array > > > This last paragraph seems to replicate what I thought was the automatic > function of the existing RAID software - to add in a spare if necessary. The idea behind this last paragraph is that we might want a floating spare, that could be attached to any of a number of arrays. I think that this sort of job is better done by user-space than by the kernel. The idea is that "mdctl --monitor" would do it for you if so configured. I haven't got around to finishing that bit yet. NeilBrown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
