From: Peter Fraser (pjfthinkage.ca)
Date: Wed Feb 01 2006 - 12:51:53 CST

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> You havn't said what types of disks. I've had IDE disks fail that
> take down the entire system. I've had IDE disks fail but the system
> remains up and happy. I've had SCSI disks fail that have made the
> SCSI cards *very* unhappy (and had the system die shortly after).
> None of these things can be solved by RAIDframe -- if the underlying
> device drivers can't "deal" in the face of lossage, RAIDframe can't
> do anything about that...

 The system is a SuperServer 5013C-T, with two hot swappable
sata drives.

> You also havn't given any indication as to the nature of the crash,
> or what the panic message was (if any). (e.g. was it a null-pointer
> dereference, or a corrupted filesystem or something that went wrong
> in the network stack?)

I came in the morning, I got no response
from the system. I eventually had to hit the init button.

I did not lose a lot of work, only an hour or
two. The old web server worked, creating a new on
was not high priority.

> I've never seen that behaviour... I find it hard to believe that
> you'd be able to queue up 2 days worth of writes without a) any reads
> being done or b) not noticing that the filesystem was completely
> unresponsive when a write of associated meta-data never returned...
> (on the first write of meta-data that didn't return, pretty much all
> IO to that filesystem should grind to a halt. Sorry.. I'm not buying
> the "it queued up things for two days"... )
 
The system was almost completely idle. The only changes I
made was editing a few small files (httpd.conf and friends)
I doubt sure that there was less then a megabyte of changes
I made.

I also assumed that the write went to the one operating disk
and a failed failure recovery caused the problem.

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]