SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

March 2008

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Summerfield <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
John Summerfield <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 27 Mar 2008 11:00:14 +0900
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (41 lines)
Michael Hannon wrote:
> Greetings.  We have a lately had a lot of trouble with relatively large
> (order of 1TB) file systems mounted on RAID 5 or RAID 6 volumes.  The
> file systems in question are based on ext3.
> 
> In a typical scenario, we have a drive go bad in a RAID array.  We then
> remove it from the array, if it isn't already, add a new hard drive
> (i.e., by hand, not from a hot spare), and add it back to the RAID
> array.  The RAID operations are all done using mdadm.
> 
> After the RAID array has completed its rebuild, we run fsck on the RAID
> device.  When we do that, fsck seems to run forever, i.e., for days at a
> time, occasionally spitting out messages about files with recognizable
> names, but never completing satisfactorily.

It would be very interesting to try to replicate the fsck on a single 
SATA drive. Several vendors have 1000 Gbyte drives for less than I 
recall paying for a Bigfoot.

If needs be, you could stripe two to get the size up, but a single drive 
eliminates the complexities of your current setup.

I imaging if a desktop pc took days to fsck, someone would have noticed.




-- 

Cheers
John

-- spambait
[log in to unmask]  [log in to unmask]
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2