lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch] document flash/RAID dangers
On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:

> On Tue 2009-08-25 17:20:13, david@lang.hm wrote:
>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue 2009-08-25 16:56:40, david@lang.hm wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 26 Aug 2009, Pavel Machek wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There are storage devices that high highly undesirable properties
>>>>> when they are disconnected or suffer power failures while writes are
>>>>> in progress; such devices include flash devices and MD RAID 4/5/6
>>>>> arrays.
>>>>
>>>> change this to say 'degraded MD RAID 4/5/6 arrays'
>>>>
>>>> also find out if DM RAID 4/5/6 arrays suffer the same problem (I strongly
>>>> suspect that they do)
>>>
>>> I changed it to say MD/DM.
>>>
>>>> then you need to add a note that if the array becomes degraded before a
>>>> scrub cycle happens previously hidden damage (that would have been
>>>> repaired by the scrub) can surface.
>>>
>>> I'd prefer not to talk about scrubing and such details here. Better
>>> leave warning here and point to MD documentation.
>>
>> I disagree with that, the way you are wording this makes it sound as if
>> raid isn't worth it. if you are going to say that raid is risky you need
>> to properly specify when it is risky
>
> Ok, would this help? I don't really want to go to scrubbing details.
>
> (*) Degraded array or single disk failure "near" the powerfail is
> neccessary for this property of RAID arrays to bite.

that sounds reasonable

David Lang


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-08-26 03:21    [W:1.761 / U:0.024 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site