Neil Brown <neilb@xxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, 27 Jan 2010 08:41:38 +0100
> Luca Berra <bluca@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 11:28:03PM +0100, Giovanni Tessore wrote:
>> > Is this some kind of bug?
>> No
>
>
> I'm not sure I agree.
> If a device is generating lots of read errors, we really should do something
> proactive about that.
> If there is a hot spare, then building onto that while keeping the original
> active (yes, still on the todo list) would be a good thing to do.
>
> v1.x metadata allows the number of corrected errors to be recorded across
> restarts so a real long-term value can be used as a trigger.
>
> So there certainly are useful improvements that could be made here.
>
> NeilBrown
Someone mentioned there already is an error count. Maybe throw a warning
message to mdadm every 1,2,4,8,16,32,... errors?
Locally I would see the read errors in the syslog/kernel.log and start
saving for a new drive. So I'm already warned. But for remote systems a
mail from mdadm would be nice.
MfG
Goswin
--
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
