Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-xfs); Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:34:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from castor.acu.ac.uk (castor.acu.ac.uk [194.81.120.81]) by oss.sgi.com (8.12.10/8.12.9) with SMTP id hBAGXlTa005946 for ; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:33:48 -0800 Received: from acu.ac.uk (arcturus.acu.ac.uk [194.81.120.110]) by castor.acu.ac.uk (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id hBAGXcGD007337; Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:33:39 GMT Message-ID: <3FD74AE2.2010600@acu.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:33:38 +0000 From: Mike Brodbelt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020623 Debian/1.0.0-0.woody.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Jeffrey E. Hundstad" CC: linux-xfs@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: XFS filesystem shutdown References: <3FD5ED83.7000500@acu.ac.uk> <1432.10.1.200.117.1071040970.squirrel@imap01.ch.sauter-bc.com> <3FD6F55A.2060707@acu.ac.uk> <3FD6F719.7090009@epost.de> <3FD6F906.9070603@acu.ac.uk> <3FD74730.9070602@mnsu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV version 'clamd / ClamAV version devel-20031209', clamav-milter version '0.65i' X-archive-position: 1338 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: linux-xfs-bounce@oss.sgi.com X-original-sender: m.brodbelt@acu.ac.uk Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-xfs Content-Length: 1672 Lines: 32 Jeffrey E. Hundstad wrote: > What enclosures are you using for your drives? We had a ICP vortex card > with CI-design enclosures we bought that we're supposed to be > ultra-160. I have had enclosure problems on that machine in the past. I have U160 drives, but I've got the sync rate set down to 80, as I was getting an unacceptably high level of retries, and I had disks reported as failed when they were fine. Operating at 80MB, they seem to be OK, though I have seen some retries. I have been operating on the assumption (as there's nothing in the controller's event log) that the host OS would see only good data from the controller even where a disk retry occurs. > As it tuns out when we opened the CI-design enclosures they > didn't meet any of the ultra-160 design goals. ...We threw out the > enclosures and the ICP vortex card works fine. ...We only had problems > with the enclosure setup when a drive had a little problems -- soft > retries for example, then it threw the whole scsi channel into > disarray. Many disks LOOKED as if it had a problem, it of course nuked > the raid-5 array. ...If you checked each drive individually each drive > succeeded (including the original failed disk.) ...and I could run > bonnie++ on it for weeks. ...but several days into a production run it > would fail. I have a second machine, also running an ICP controller and XFS, but with ICY DOCK caddies. These operate perfectly with SCA disks at U160. This machine has never reported any XFS errors, so I suppose it may be worth my while purchasing new caddies and swapping them out. Unreliable SCSI chains are certainly not much fun at all.... Mike.