(Please don't reply off-list. If the conversation starts on the list, please leave it there unless there is a VERY GOOD reason). On Monday May 22, stefano.russo@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > On 5/19/06, Neil Brown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Friday May 19, ste@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > As i can see the bitmap do exactly this, but the default bitmap is too > > > small! > > > > Why do you say that? > > Are you using an internal bitmap, or a bitmap in a separate file? > > > I was using bitmap in a separate file. > Why i said that tha bitmap is too small? I try to explain: > > the raid device is a raid1, created on /dev/md0 trought mdadm, and the > bitmap use a 4 kb chunk-size on external file (in root directory) > > > setfaulty /dev/md0 /dev/nda > raidhotremove /dev/md0 /dev/nda > cd /mnt/md0 > wget http://... (240 kb file...) > raidhotadd /dev/md0 /dev/nda > > And now dmesg said that the bitmap was obsolete (0<1 or something like that) > and that the md driver will force a total recovery. raidhotadd doesn't know anything about bitmaps. If you use 'mdadm /dev/mda --add /dev/nda' you should find that it works better. I recommend getting rid of setfaulty / raidhotadd /raidhotremove etc and just using mdadm. NeilBrown > > A recovery of 40 gb for a 240 kb file is a little bit expensive.. :-) > > Unfortunately i cannot give you the exact output because the server is down > now.:-| > > > The only way to control the size of the bitmap is the change the > > bitmap chunk size. > > > Okay thanks. > > Warning: if you have more than 1 million bits in the bitmap, the > > kernel may fail in memory allocation and may not be able to assemble > > your array. > > > Thankyou for your help. > > Stefano. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
