Re: raid5 software vs hardware: parity calculations?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Robin Bowes wrote:

> I'm running RAID6 instead of RAID5+1 - I've had a couple of instances
> where a drive has failed in a RAID5+1 array and a second has failed
> during the rebuild after the hot-spare had kicked in.

if the failures were read errors without losing the entire disk (the 
typical case) then new kernels are much better -- on read error md will 
reconstruct the sectors from the other disks and attempt to write it back.

you can also run monthly "checks"...

echo check >/sys/block/mdX/md/sync_action

it'll read the entire array (parity included) and correct read errors as 
they're discovered.

-dean
-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux