Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*xfs_force

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*xfs_force_shutdown\s+after\s+Raid\s+crash\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Steffen Knauf <Steffen.Knauf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 22:53:19 +0100; Hello, after a raid crash (Raid Controller problem, 3 Disks of the Disk Group were kicked out oft the diskgroup), 2 of 3 partitions (XFS FS) were shutdown immediately. Perhaps somebody has a idea, wh; /archives/xfs/2009-01/msg01240.html (11,260 bytes)
2. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 05:57:12 -0500; This looks like you were running with a write back cache enabled on the controller / disks but without barriers. xfs_repair should be able to repair the filesystem. If you're lucky only the freespace; /archives/xfs/2009-01/msg01246.html (7,474 bytes)
3. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 02:22:47 +0100; I've read that this is dangerous. How can I tell if I suffer the same? I use an Areca 1680 SAS RAID Controller with 2GB Cache, so there could be a lot of writes in it. mfg zmi -- // Michael Monnerie,; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00025.html (8,056 bytes)
4. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 21:13:55 -0600; you'd need to read the docs for your controller, to find out how to tell if it has a writeback cache enabled, and whether it is batter-backed or not. -Eric; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00027.html (7,934 bytes)
5. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:22:38 +0100; Sorry I didn't write that. Yes it's writeback (can be switched off) and it's battery backed. Is there no danger then? Because in the mail from Chris, he wrote he got problems because there was "with; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00034.html (9,187 bytes)
6. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 04:32:39 -0500; Yes. I would hope raid controllers disable the write cache on disks, but for lower end controllers I'm not sure they really do it.; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00037.html (8,337 bytes)
7. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 11:40:08 +0100; On Areca Controllers, I can select if I want it on or off. Could an information about the disk cache be written to the FAQ? Would for sure save some people's data... :-) So battery backed controller; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00038.html (8,760 bytes)
8. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:49:08 -0500; Yeah, that sounds correct. Do you volunteer for the FAQ entry? xfs.org is a wiki so you could add it. I'm happy to proof-read it if you want.; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00040.html (8,819 bytes)
9. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 09:52:45 +0100; I don't know if it's good and correct, I just put this in the wiki, and additionally changed 2 sections, please check the wiki log if it's correct: == Q. What about the hard disk write cache? == The; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00067.html (9,705 bytes)
10. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 11:27:46 +0100; What just comes to my mind: what about XEN/VMware? What settings should be used within a virtual machine? Even if I have battery backed cache and nobarrier on the host, the VM itself could crash, or; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00069.html (9,017 bytes)
11. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 23:22:41 +1100; I'd drop this paragraph - powerfail can destroy filesystems even on a single disk (e.g. root directory gets corrupted). I'd change this to say "*must* disable the individual hard disk write caches" t; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00071.html (10,231 bytes)
12. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 23:26:25 +1100; Depends on the implementation of the hypervisor. Cheers, Dave. -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00072.html (10,430 bytes)
13. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 13:45:38 +0100; Le Wed, 4 Feb 2009 23:22:41 +1100 Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> écrivait: I have some controllers at hand, and I had a quick glance : - Adaptec : allows setting individual drives cache arcconf s; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00073.html (10,725 bytes)
14. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: KELEMEN Peter <Peter.Kelemen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:01:13 +0100; * Emmanuel Florac (eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) [20090204 13:45]: /cX/uX set cache=off http://www.3ware.com/support/UserDocs/CLIGuide-9.5.1.1.pdf , page 86 HTH, Peter -- .+'''+. .+'''+. .+'''+. .+'''+. .+; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00074.html (11,317 bytes)
15. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:03:22 +0100; OK, so we don't know? I guess VMware will be the most used for Linux systems, and XEN usage will soon grow a lot as it's directly in the kernel now. Does anybody know for those two, whether "nobarrie; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00075.html (11,101 bytes)
16. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:15:59 +0100; Le Wed, 4 Feb 2009 15:01:13 +0100 KELEMEN Peter <Peter.Kelemen@xxxxxxx> écrivait: Yes but it set cache for the array globally, I don't find anything about the individual disks write cache specificall; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00076.html (11,012 bytes)
17. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:24:27 +0100; (compressing 2 answers here) Isn't that what barriers are for? If I understand correctly, barriers help against destroying the filesys, except root dir? But that should "easily" be fixable with xfs_r; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00077.html (11,778 bytes)
18. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Michael Monnerie <michael.monnerie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:25:41 +0100; [This talk is about which controllers allow individual disk write cache to be turned off] correcting: Areca: yes mfg zmi -- // Michael Monnerie, Ing.BSc -- http://it-management.at // Tel: 0660 / 415; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00078.html (10,404 bytes)
19. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: Ralf Liebenow <ralf@xxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:33:22 +0100; Hello ! Maybe this is a stupid question: Should Battery backed RAID controllers not always set their discs cache off ? As I see it (in case of a power failure): - the discs are connectet to the main; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00079.html (13,403 bytes)
20. Re: xfs_force_shutdown after Raid crash (score: 1): Author: KELEMEN Peter <Peter.Kelemen@xxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 16:41:53 +0100; * Emmanuel Florac (eflorac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) [20090204 16:15]: "Write cache includes the disk drive cache and controller cache." I assume this means you can only set the drive caches and the unit cache; /archives/xfs/2009-02/msg00080.html (11,407 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]