public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jakob Østergaard" <jakob@unthought.net>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Cc: "Alok K. Dhir" <alok@dhir.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Autostart RAID 1+0 (root)
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2002 18:46:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020122184600.C11697@unthought.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <001201c1a03e$e654acd0$9865fea9@pcsn630778> <Pine.LNX.3.96.1020122120342.27404A-100000@gatekeeper.tmr.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.1020122120342.27404A-100000@gatekeeper.tmr.com>; from davidsen@tmr.com on Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 12:15:28PM -0500

On Tue, Jan 22, 2002 at 12:15:28PM -0500, Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Jan 2002, Alok K. Dhir wrote:
> 
> > I want to test using a software RAID 1+0 partition as root: md0 and md1
> > set up as mirrors between two disks each, and md2 set up as a stripe
> > between md0 and md1.  However, the RedHat 7.2 installer doesn't allow
> > creating nested RAID partitions.
> 
> Here's my understanding. If you are using hardware RAID you can do
> anything your controller supports, and it looks like a single drive to the
> CPU. But if you are looking for reliable boot, you need to use /boot as a
> RAID-1 partition on the first two drives, and make that partition the
> active partition (that may not be needed with your BIOS).

I think he is referring to software RAID. And yes, it is indeed a problem
that the RedHat installer cannot create nested RAIDs (at least, I too was
unable to do that, so either it's impossible, or I'm equally blind).

> This is because if the first disk fails totally, the 2nd will be used to
> boot. You also should use an initrd image to be sure all you need to get
> up is on that small mirrored partition. After that your other partitions
> can be whatever pleases you.

Also, GRUB/LILO only support booting from RAID-1 (or no RAID).

...
> > 
> > Does the kernel support autostarting nested RAID partitions?
> > 

Yes it does.  If you have persistent superblocks on all arrays, they
*should* autostart.

If you boot from the 4G disk, does the array start properly ?  Does
it start properly even if you remove your /etc/raidtab ?

Please check that you have the correct RAID levels either compiled
into your kernel, or on an initrd.

> > Is doing software 1+0 a bad idea anyway due to performance issues?
> 
> It should outperform most other RAID configs under heavy load, but in most
> cases RAID-5 is fine for system which don't need the absolute highest
> performance. Note that the extra writes are queued and there are no extra
> reads unless it is in recovery mode. RAID-1 can be faster, because there
> are two copies of the data, if one drive is busy the other can be used. I
> haven't checked to see that software RAID does that correctly and gets the
> benefit.

A performance improvement went into 2.4 at some stage - all newer 2.4 kernels
will schedule reads to the mirror which has it's head nearest to where the
read should occur.  This works very well in my experience.

-- 
................................................................
:   jakob@unthought.net   : And I see the elder races,         :
:.........................: putrid forms of man                :
:   Jakob Østergaard      : See him rise and claim the earth,  :
:        OZ9ABN           : his downfall is at hand.           :
:.........................:............{Konkhra}...............:

  reply	other threads:[~2002-01-22 17:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-01-18 16:40 Autostart RAID 1+0 (root) Alok K. Dhir
2002-01-19  0:11 ` Tim Moore
2002-01-22 17:15 ` Bill Davidsen
2002-01-22 17:46   ` Jakob Østergaard [this message]
2002-01-22 18:07     ` Alok K. Dhir
2002-01-22 20:12     ` Bill Davidsen
2002-01-22 21:52       ` Jakob Østergaard

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=20020122184600.C11697@unthought.net \
    --to=jakob@unthought.net \
    --cc=alok@dhir.net \
    --cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox