LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* RAID sync
@ 2001-10-01 14:27 Oleg A. Yurlov
  2001-10-02  5:19 ` Jakob Østergaard
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Oleg A. Yurlov @ 2001-10-01 14:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-kernel


        Привет :-)

        Kernel 2.4.6.SuSE-4GB-SMP, 2 CPU, 2Gb RAM, 4 HDD SCSI, M/B Intel L440GX.
Messages from dmesg:

(scsi0:0:3:0) Synchronous at 80.0 Mbyte/sec, offset 63.
SCSI device sdd: 35843670 512-byte hdwr sectors (18352 MB)
 sdd: sdd1 sdd2
md: raid1 personality registered
md: raid5 personality registered
raid5: measuring checksumming speed
   8regs     :  1321.600 MB/sec
   32regs    :   978.400 MB/sec
   pIII_sse  :  1632.400 MB/sec
   pII_mmx   :  1790.000 MB/sec
   p5_mmx    :  1885.200 MB/sec
raid5: using function: pIII_sse (1632.400 MB/sec)
md: md driver 0.90.0 MAX_MD_DEVS=256, MD_SB_DISKS=27
md: Autodetecting RAID arrays.
(read) sda2's sb offset: 15815872 [events: 0000001d]
(read) sdb2's sb offset: 15815872 [events: 0000001c]
(read) sdc2's sb offset: 15815872 [events: 0000001d]
(read) sdd2's sb offset: 15815872 [events: 0000001d]
md: autorun ...
md: considering sdd2 ...
md:  adding sdd2 ...
md:  adding sdc2 ...
md: created md1
md: bind<sdc2,1>
md: bind<sdd2,2>
md: running: <sdd2><sdc2>
md: now!
md: sdd2's event counter: 0000001d
md: sdc2's event counter: 0000001d
md1: max total readahead window set to 508k
md1: 1 data-disks, max readahead per data-disk: 508k
raid1: device sdd2 operational as mirror 1
raid1: device sdc2 operational as mirror 0
raid1: raid set md1 active with 2 out of 2 mirrors
md: updating md1 RAID superblock on device
md: sdd2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdd2's sb offset: 15815872
md: sdc2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdc2's sb offset: 15815872
md: considering sdb2 ...
md:  adding sdb2 ...
md:  adding sda2 ...
md: created md0
md: bind<sda2,1>
md: bind<sdb2,2>
md: running: <sdb2><sda2>
md: now!
md: sdb2's event counter: 0000001c
md: sda2's event counter: 0000001d
md: superblock update time inconsistency -- using the most recent one
md: freshest: sda2
md0: max total readahead window set to 508k
md0: 1 data-disks, max readahead per data-disk: 508k
raid1: device sdb2 operational as mirror 1
raid1: device sda2 operational as mirror 0
raid1: raid set md0 active with 2 out of 2 mirrors
md: updating md0 RAID superblock on device
md: sdb2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdb2's sb offset: 15815872
md: sda2 [events: 0000001e](write) sda2's sb offset: 15815872
md: ... autorun DONE.

        Why RAID do not start synchronization ? It is normal ?

--
Oleg A. Yurlov aka Kris Werewolf, SysAdmin      OAY100-RIPN
mailto:kris@spylog.com                          +7 095 332-03-88


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: RAID sync
  2001-10-01 14:27 RAID sync Oleg A. Yurlov
@ 2001-10-02  5:19 ` Jakob Østergaard
  2001-10-08 23:26 ` Neil Brown
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jakob Østergaard @ 2001-10-02  5:19 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Oleg A. Yurlov; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 06:27:53PM +0400, Oleg A. Yurlov wrote:
> 
>         Privet :-)
> 
>         Kernel 2.4.6.SuSE-4GB-SMP, 2 CPU, 2Gb RAM, 4 HDD SCSI, M/B Intel L440GX.
> Messages from dmesg:
> 
...
> md: sdc2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdc2's sb offset: 15815872
> md: considering sdb2 ...
> md:  adding sdb2 ...
> md:  adding sda2 ...
> md: created md0
> md: bind<sda2,1>
> md: bind<sdb2,2>
> md: running: <sdb2><sda2>
> md: now!
> md: sdb2's event counter: 0000001c
> md: sda2's event counter: 0000001d
> md: superblock update time inconsistency -- using the most recent one
> md: freshest: sda2
> md0: max total readahead window set to 508k
> md0: 1 data-disks, max readahead per data-disk: 508k
> raid1: device sdb2 operational as mirror 1
> raid1: device sda2 operational as mirror 0
> raid1: raid set md0 active with 2 out of 2 mirrors
> md: updating md0 RAID superblock on device
> md: sdb2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdb2's sb offset: 15815872
> md: sda2 [events: 0000001e](write) sda2's sb offset: 15815872
> md: ... autorun DONE.
> 
>         Why RAID do not start synchronization ? It is normal ?

Doesn't it ?

Try "cat /proc/mdstat"

Synchronization is a background operation - your array is functional
immediately.

(this behaviour was changed from the really really old RAID code in unpatched
 2.2 to standard 2.4)

-- 
................................................................
:   jakob@unthought.net   : And I see the elder races,         :
:.........................: putrid forms of man                :
:   Jakob Østergaard      : See him rise and claim the earth,  :
:        OZ9ABN           : his downfall is at hand.           :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: RAID sync
  2001-10-01 14:27 RAID sync Oleg A. Yurlov
  2001-10-02  5:19 ` Jakob Østergaard
@ 2001-10-08 23:26 ` Neil Brown
  2001-10-09 19:32 ` Re[2]: " Oleg A. Yurlov
  2001-10-09 19:37 ` Oleg A. Yurlov
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Neil Brown @ 2001-10-08 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Oleg A. Yurlov; +Cc: linux-kernel

On Monday October 1, kris@spylog.com wrote:
> 
>         Kernel 2.4.6.SuSE-4GB-SMP, 2 CPU, 2Gb RAM, 4 HDD SCSI, M/B Intel L440GX.
> Messages from dmesg:
snip
> md: now!
> md: sdb2's event counter: 0000001c
> md: sda2's event counter: 0000001d
snip
> 
>         Why RAID do not start synchronization ? It is normal ?

Yes.
A difference of 1 in the event counters isn't considered enough to
treat on of them as old, and presumably the newest one (sda2) was
marked clean.
This could happen if the array was shut down cleanly, the new super
block (with the dirty bit cleared) was written to sda2, but the new
superblock was NOT written to sdb2 for some reason.  In this situation
there is no need to resync the array.

Could this be what happened in your case?

NeilBrown


> 
> --
> Oleg A. Yurlov aka Kris Werewolf, SysAdmin      OAY100-RIPN
> mailto:kris@spylog.com                          +7 095 332-03-88
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re[2]: RAID sync
  2001-10-01 14:27 RAID sync Oleg A. Yurlov
  2001-10-02  5:19 ` Jakob Østergaard
  2001-10-08 23:26 ` Neil Brown
@ 2001-10-09 19:32 ` Oleg A. Yurlov
  2001-10-10  5:58   ` Jakob Østergaard
  2001-10-09 19:37 ` Oleg A. Yurlov
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Oleg A. Yurlov @ 2001-10-09 19:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jakob Østergaard; +Cc: linux-kernel, admin


        Hi, Jakob and all,

Tuesday, October 02, 2001, 9:19:49 AM, you wrote:

JØ> On Mon, Oct 01, 2001 at 06:27:53PM +0400, Oleg A. Yurlov wrote:
>> 
>>         Privet :-)
>> 
>>         Kernel 2.4.6.SuSE-4GB-SMP, 2 CPU, 2Gb RAM, 4 HDD SCSI, M/B Intel L440GX.
>> Messages from dmesg:
>> 
JØ> ...
>> md: sdc2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdc2's sb offset: 15815872
>> md: considering sdb2 ...
>> md:  adding sdb2 ...
>> md:  adding sda2 ...
>> md: created md0
>> md: bind<sda2,1>
>> md: bind<sdb2,2>
>> md: running: <sdb2><sda2>
>> md: now!
>> md: sdb2's event counter: 0000001c
>> md: sda2's event counter: 0000001d
>> md: superblock update time inconsistency -- using the most recent one
>> md: freshest: sda2
>> md0: max total readahead window set to 508k
>> md0: 1 data-disks, max readahead per data-disk: 508k
>> raid1: device sdb2 operational as mirror 1
>> raid1: device sda2 operational as mirror 0
>> raid1: raid set md0 active with 2 out of 2 mirrors
>> md: updating md0 RAID superblock on device
>> md: sdb2 [events: 0000001e](write) sdb2's sb offset: 15815872
>> md: sda2 [events: 0000001e](write) sda2's sb offset: 15815872
>> md: ... autorun DONE.
>> 
>>         Why RAID do not start synchronization ? It is normal ?

JØ> Doesn't it ?

        Really.

JØ> Try "cat /proc/mdstat"

JØ> Synchronization is a background operation - your array is functional
JØ> immediately.

        No,  synchronization  not  started,  /proc/mdstat  say  that  RAID is Ok
([UU]). /proc/mdstat checked immediately after booting.

JØ> (this behaviour was changed from the really really old RAID code in unpatched
JØ>  2.2 to standard 2.4)

        Neil already has given some explanations...

--
Oleg A. Yurlov aka Kris Werewolf, SysAdmin      OAY100-RIPN
mailto:kris@spylog.com                          +7 095 332-03-88


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re[2]: RAID sync
  2001-10-01 14:27 RAID sync Oleg A. Yurlov
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2001-10-09 19:32 ` Re[2]: " Oleg A. Yurlov
@ 2001-10-09 19:37 ` Oleg A. Yurlov
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Oleg A. Yurlov @ 2001-10-09 19:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Neil Brown; +Cc: linux-kernel, admin


        Hi, Neil,

Tuesday, October 09, 2001, 3:26:32 AM, you wrote:

>>         Kernel 2.4.6.SuSE-4GB-SMP, 2 CPU, 2Gb RAM, 4 HDD SCSI, M/B Intel L440GX.
>> Messages from dmesg:
NB> snip
>> md: now!
>> md: sdb2's event counter: 0000001c
>> md: sda2's event counter: 0000001d
NB> snip
>>         Why RAID do not start synchronization ? It is normal ?

NB> Yes.
NB> A difference of 1 in the event counters isn't considered enough to
NB> treat on of them as old, and presumably the newest one (sda2) was
NB> marked clean.
NB> This could happen if the array was shut down cleanly, the new super
NB> block (with the dirty bit cleared) was written to sda2, but the new
NB> superblock was NOT written to sdb2 for some reason.  In this situation
NB> there is no need to resync the array.

NB> Could this be what happened in your case?

        Server  is  slow  die  (error in VM, server lost procfs) and rebooted by
'reboot -f'... I don't know what happen with RAID in this case.

NB> NeilBrown

--
Oleg A. Yurlov aka Kris Werewolf, SysAdmin      OAY100-RIPN
mailto:kris@spylog.com                          +7 095 332-03-88


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: Re[2]: RAID sync
  2001-10-09 19:32 ` Re[2]: " Oleg A. Yurlov
@ 2001-10-10  5:58   ` Jakob Østergaard
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jakob Østergaard @ 2001-10-10  5:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Oleg A. Yurlov; +Cc: linux-kernel, admin

On Tue, Oct 09, 2001 at 11:32:40PM +0400, Oleg A. Yurlov wrote:
> 
>         Hi, Jakob and all,
...
> 
> JØ> Synchronization is a background operation - your array is functional
> JØ> immediately.
> 
>         No,  synchronization  not  started,  /proc/mdstat  say  that  RAID is Ok
> ([UU]). /proc/mdstat checked immediately after booting.
> 
> JØ> (this behaviour was changed from the really really old RAID code in unpatched
> JØ>  2.2 to standard 2.4)
> 
>         Neil already has given some explanations...

I was too quick, and as far as I can see, Neil gave the correct explanation.

Hey, maybe I was wrong, but I was *faster*   ;)

-- 
................................................................
:   jakob@unthought.net   : And I see the elder races,         :
:.........................: putrid forms of man                :
:   Jakob Østergaard      : See him rise and claim the earth,  :
:        OZ9ABN           : his downfall is at hand.           :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2001-10-10  5:58 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2001-10-01 14:27 RAID sync Oleg A. Yurlov
2001-10-02  5:19 ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-10-08 23:26 ` Neil Brown
2001-10-09 19:32 ` Re[2]: " Oleg A. Yurlov
2001-10-10  5:58   ` Jakob Østergaard
2001-10-09 19:37 ` Oleg A. Yurlov

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).