From: Ric Wheeler <rwheeler@redhat.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: david@lang.hm, Theodore Tso <tytso@mit.edu>,
Florian Weimer <fweimer@bfk.de>,
Goswin von Brederlow <goswin-v-b@web.de>,
Rob Landley <rob@landley.net>,
kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
mtk.manpages@gmail.com, rdunlap@xenotime.net,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org,
corbet@lwn.net
Subject: Re: [patch] document flash/RAID dangers
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:26:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A94812C.5010803@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090826001206.GL4300@elf.ucw.cz>
On 08/25/2009 08:12 PM, 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.
Than you should punt the MD discussion to the MD documentation entirely.
I would suggest:
"Users of any file system that have a single media (SSD, flash or normal disk)
can suffer from catastrophic and complete data loss if that single media fails.
To reduce your exposure to data loss after a single point of failure, consider
using either hardware or properly configured software RAID. See the
documentation on MD RAID for how to configure it.
To insure proper fsync() semantics, you will need to have a storage device that
supports write barriers or have a non-volatile write cache. If not, best
practices dictate disabling the write cache on the storage device."
>
>>> THESE devices have the property of potentially corrupting blocks being
>>> written at the time of the power failure,
>>
>> this is true of all devices
>
> Actually I don't think so. I believe SATA disks do not corrupt even
> the sector they are writing to -- they just have big enough
> capacitors. And yes I believe ext3 depends on that.
> Pavel
Pavel, no S-ATA drive has capacitors to hold up during a power failure (or even
enough power to destage their write cache). I know this from direct, personal
knowledge having built RAID boxes at EMC for years. In fact, almost all RAID
boxes require that the write cache be hardwired to off when used in their arrays.
Drives fail partially on a very common basis - look at your remapped sector
count with smartctl.
RAID (including MD RAID5) will protect you from this most common error as it
will protect you from complete drive failure which is also an extremely common
event.
Your scenario is really, really rare - doing a full rebuild after a complete
drive failure (takes a matter of hours, depends on the size of the disk) and
having a power failure during that rebuild.
Of course adding a UPS to any storage system (including MD RAID system) helps
make it more reliable, specifically in your scenario.
The more important point is that having any RAID (MD1, MD5 or MD6) will greatly
reduce your chance of data loss if configured correctly. With ext3, ext2 or zfs.
Ric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-08-26 0:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 269+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-12 9:21 ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible Pavel Machek
2009-03-12 11:40 ` Jochen Voß
2009-03-21 11:24 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-12 19:13 ` Rob Landley
2009-03-16 12:28 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-16 19:26 ` Rob Landley
2009-03-23 10:45 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-30 15:06 ` Goswin von Brederlow
[not found] ` <20090824093143.GD25591@elf.ucw.cz>
2009-08-24 11:19 ` [patch] " Florian Weimer
2009-08-24 13:01 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-24 14:55 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-08-24 22:30 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-24 19:52 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-24 20:24 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-24 20:52 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-24 21:08 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-24 21:25 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-24 22:05 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-24 22:22 ` Zan Lynx
2009-08-24 22:44 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 0:34 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-24 23:42 ` david
2009-08-24 22:41 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-24 22:39 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-24 23:00 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] ` <20090824230036.GK29763@elf.ucw.cz>
2009-08-25 0:02 ` david
2009-08-25 9:32 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 0:06 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-25 9:34 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 15:34 ` david
2009-08-26 3:32 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-26 11:17 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 11:29 ` david
2009-08-26 13:10 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 13:43 ` david
2009-08-26 18:02 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-27 6:28 ` Eric Sandeen
2009-11-09 8:53 ` periodic fsck was " Pavel Machek
[not found] ` <20091109085318.GE4818@elf.ucw.cz>
2009-11-09 14:05 ` Theodore Tso
2009-11-09 15:58 ` Andreas Dilger
2009-08-30 7:03 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 12:28 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-27 6:06 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-27 6:54 ` david
2009-08-27 7:34 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-28 14:37 ` david
2009-08-30 7:19 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-30 12:48 ` david
2009-08-27 5:27 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-25 0:08 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-25 9:42 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] ` <20090825094244.GC15563@elf.ucw.cz>
2009-08-25 13:37 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-25 13:42 ` Alan Cox
2009-08-27 3:16 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-25 21:15 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 22:42 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-25 22:51 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 23:03 ` david
2009-08-25 23:29 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 23:03 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-25 23:26 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 23:40 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-25 23:48 ` david
2009-08-25 23:53 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:11 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 0:16 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:31 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 1:00 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-26 1:15 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 1:16 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 2:53 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
[not found] ` <20090826011605.GS4300@elf.ucw.cz>
2009-08-26 2:55 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-26 13:37 ` Ric Wheeler
[not found] ` <4A948C94.7040103@redhat.com>
2009-08-26 2:58 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-26 10:39 ` Ric Wheeler
[not found] ` <4A9510D2.1090704@redhat.com>
2009-08-26 11:12 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 11:28 ` david
2009-08-29 9:49 ` [testcase] test your fs/storage stack (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 11:28 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-02 20:12 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-02 20:42 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-02 23:00 ` Rob Landley
2009-09-02 23:09 ` david
2009-09-03 8:55 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-03 0:36 ` jim owens
2009-09-03 2:41 ` Rob Landley
2009-09-03 14:14 ` jim owens
2009-09-04 7:44 ` Rob Landley
2009-09-04 11:49 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-05 10:28 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-05 12:20 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-05 13:54 ` Jonathan Corbet
2009-09-05 21:27 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-05 21:56 ` Theodore Tso
2009-09-02 22:45 ` Rob Landley
2009-09-02 22:49 ` [PATCH] Update Documentation/md.txt to mention journaling won't help dirty+degraded case Rob Landley
2009-09-03 9:08 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-03 12:05 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-03 12:31 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 16:35 ` [testcase] test your fs/storage stack (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) david
2009-08-30 7:07 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 12:01 ` [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 12:23 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-30 7:01 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-27 5:19 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-27 12:24 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-27 13:10 ` Ric Wheeler
[not found] ` <4A9685D4.2070906@redhat.com>
2009-08-27 16:54 ` MD/DM and barriers (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) Jeff Garzik
2009-08-27 18:09 ` Alasdair G Kergon
2009-09-01 14:01 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-02 16:17 ` Michael Tokarev
2009-08-29 10:02 ` [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible Pavel Machek
2009-09-03 9:47 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 3:50 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-27 3:53 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-27 11:43 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-27 20:51 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-27 22:00 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-28 14:49 ` david
2009-08-29 10:05 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 20:22 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-29 21:34 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-03 16:56 ` what fsck can (and can't) do was " david
2009-09-03 19:27 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-27 22:13 ` raid is dangerous but that's secret (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) Pavel Machek
2009-08-28 1:32 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-28 6:44 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-28 7:31 ` NeilBrown
2009-11-09 10:50 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-28 11:16 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-01 13:58 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-28 7:11 ` raid is dangerous but that's secret Florian Weimer
2009-08-28 7:23 ` NeilBrown
2009-08-28 12:08 ` raid is dangerous but that's secret (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) Theodore Tso
2009-08-30 7:51 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] ` <20090830075135.GA1874@ucw.cz>
2009-08-30 9:01 ` Christian Kujau
2009-09-02 20:55 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-30 12:55 ` david
2009-08-30 14:12 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-30 14:44 ` Michael Tokarev
2009-08-30 16:10 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-30 16:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-08-31 13:15 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 13:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-08-31 13:19 ` Mark Lord
2009-08-31 13:21 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-08-31 15:14 ` jim owens
2009-09-03 1:59 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-03 11:12 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-09-03 11:18 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-03 13:34 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-09-03 13:50 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-03 13:59 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-09-03 14:15 ` wishful thinking about atomic, multi-sector or full MD stripe width, writes in storage Ric Wheeler
2009-09-03 14:26 ` Florian Weimer
2009-09-03 15:09 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-03 23:50 ` Krzysztof Halasa
2009-09-04 0:39 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-04 21:21 ` Mark Lord
2009-09-04 21:29 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-05 12:57 ` Mark Lord
2009-09-05 13:40 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-09-05 21:43 ` NeilBrown
2009-09-07 11:45 ` Pavel Machek
2009-09-07 13:10 ` Theodore Tso
2010-04-04 13:47 ` fsck more often when powerfail is detected (was Re: wishful thinking about atomic, multi-sector or full MD stripe width, writes in storage) Pavel Machek
2010-04-04 17:39 ` tytso
2010-04-04 17:59 ` Rob Landley
2010-04-04 18:45 ` Pavel Machek
2010-04-04 19:35 ` tytso
2010-04-04 19:29 ` tytso
2010-04-04 23:58 ` Rob Landley
2009-09-03 14:35 ` raid is dangerous but that's secret (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) david
2009-08-31 13:22 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 15:50 ` david
2009-08-31 16:21 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 18:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2009-08-31 19:11 ` david
2009-08-30 15:05 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-30 15:20 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-31 17:49 ` Jesse Brandeburg
[not found] ` <4807377b0908311049id9a2167r937bc8447c2b3546@mail.gmail.com>
2009-08-31 18:01 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-31 21:01 ` MD5/6? (was Re: raid is dangerous but that's secret ...) Ron Johnson
2009-08-31 18:07 ` raid is dangerous but that's secret (was Re: [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible) martin f krafft
2009-08-31 22:26 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2009-08-31 23:19 ` Ron Johnson
2009-09-01 5:45 ` martin f krafft
2009-09-05 10:34 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 23:46 ` [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible david
2009-08-25 23:08 ` Neil Brown
2009-08-25 23:44 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 4:08 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-26 11:15 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-27 3:29 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-25 16:11 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-25 22:21 ` [patch] document flash/RAID dangers Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 22:33 ` david
2009-08-25 22:40 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 22:59 ` david
2009-08-25 23:37 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 23:48 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 0:06 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:12 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 0:20 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:26 ` david
2009-08-26 0:28 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 0:38 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:45 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 11:21 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 11:58 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 12:40 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-26 13:11 ` Ric Wheeler
[not found] ` <4A95349E.7010101@redhat.com>
2009-08-26 13:44 ` david
2009-08-29 9:38 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 4:24 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-26 11:22 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 14:45 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-29 9:39 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 11:47 ` Ron Johnson
2009-08-29 16:12 ` jim owens
2009-08-25 23:56 ` david
2009-08-26 0:12 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:20 ` david
2009-08-26 0:39 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 1:17 ` david
2009-08-26 0:26 ` Ric Wheeler [this message]
2009-08-26 0:44 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 0:50 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-26 1:19 ` david
2009-08-26 11:25 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 12:37 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-30 6:49 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-26 4:20 ` Rik van Riel
2009-08-25 22:27 ` [patch] document that ext2 can't handle barriers Pavel Machek
2009-08-27 3:34 ` [patch] ext2/3: document conditions when reliable operation is possible Rob Landley
2009-08-27 8:46 ` David Woodhouse
2009-08-28 14:46 ` david
2009-08-29 10:09 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 16:27 ` david
2009-08-29 21:33 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 22:58 ` Neil Brown
2009-08-25 23:10 ` Ric Wheeler
2009-08-25 23:32 ` NeilBrown
2009-08-24 21:11 ` Greg Freemyer
2009-08-25 20:56 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-25 21:08 ` david
2009-08-25 18:52 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-25 14:43 ` Florian Weimer
2009-08-24 13:50 ` Theodore Tso
2009-08-24 18:48 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-24 18:39 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-24 13:21 ` Greg Freemyer
2009-08-24 18:44 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 23:28 ` Neil Brown
2009-08-26 1:34 ` david
2009-08-24 21:11 ` Rob Landley
2009-08-24 21:33 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-25 18:45 ` Jan Kara
2009-03-16 12:30 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-16 19:03 ` Theodore Tso
2009-03-23 18:23 ` Pavel Machek
2009-03-16 19:40 ` Sitsofe Wheeler
2009-03-16 21:43 ` Rob Landley
2009-03-17 4:55 ` Kyle Moffett
2009-03-23 11:00 ` Pavel Machek
2009-08-29 1:33 ` Robert Hancock
2009-08-29 13:04 ` Alan Cox
2009-03-16 19:45 ` Greg Freemyer
2009-03-16 21:48 ` Pavel Machek
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=4A94812C.5010803@redhat.com \
--to=rwheeler@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=david@lang.hm \
--cc=fweimer@bfk.de \
--cc=goswin-v-b@web.de \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages@gmail.com \
--cc=pavel@ucw.cz \
--cc=rdunlap@xenotime.net \
--cc=rob@landley.net \
--cc=tytso@mit.edu \
/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 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).