From: Wols Lists <antlists@youngman.org.uk>
To: James J <james.j@shiftmail.org>, linux-raid <linux-raid@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: md failing mechanism
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 14:09:45 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56A389A9.1080203@youngman.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <56A2BDF7.7020101@shiftmail.org>
On 22/01/16 23:40, James J wrote:
> The recommentation of raising the timeout to 120+ is for the opposite
> purpose of what you want. It is for the case the sysadmin accepts to
> wait a long time because he wants to prevent the kicking of the drive at
> the first read-error (normally drives are kicked for a write error).
> This might be wanted in order to a) defer the replacement of the drive,
> either to perform the replacement at a more opportune time and/or in a
> better manner such as a no-degrade replace operation, or b) because he
> does not want to replace the drive at all: maybe he believes that the
> error might be spurious and will not happen again and the drive is still
> of acceptable fitness for the purpose, e.g. in a low-cost file server.
Except, aiui, even in your scenario! drives are kicked for a *write* error.
What happens (should be) is the kernel times out, the raid handles the
read error by trying a rewrite, the drive is still hung on the read
error so it doesn't respond to the write request, and the drive gets
kicked for a write failure.
Cheers,
Wol
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-23 14:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-22 17:59 md failing mechanism Dark Penguin
2016-01-22 19:29 ` Phil Turmel
2016-01-22 20:00 ` Wols Lists
2016-01-22 21:44 ` Dark Penguin
2016-01-22 22:18 ` Phil Turmel
2016-01-22 22:50 ` Dark Penguin
2016-01-22 23:23 ` Edward Kuns
2016-01-22 23:34 ` Wols Lists
2016-01-23 0:09 ` Dark Penguin
2016-01-22 22:37 ` Edward Kuns
2016-01-22 23:07 ` Dark Penguin
2016-01-22 23:39 ` Wols Lists
2016-01-23 0:09 ` Dark Penguin
2016-01-23 0:34 ` Phil Turmel
2016-01-23 10:33 ` Dark Penguin
2016-01-23 15:12 ` Phil Turmel
2016-01-22 23:40 ` James J
2016-01-23 0:44 ` Phil Turmel
2016-01-23 14:09 ` Wols Lists [this message]
2016-01-23 19:02 ` James J
2016-01-24 22:13 ` Adam Goryachev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=56A389A9.1080203@youngman.org.uk \
--to=antlists@youngman.org.uk \
--cc=james.j@shiftmail.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.