public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakob Oestergaard <jakob@unthought.net>
To: Kiniger <karl.kiniger@med.ge.com>
Cc: Lars Marowsky-Bree <lmb@suse.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: raid 1 - automatic 'repair' possible?
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:55:19 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050119115519.GY347@unthought.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050119104852.GB3087@wszip-kinigka.euro.med.ge.com>

On Wed, Jan 19, 2005 at 11:48:52AM +0100, Kiniger wrote:
...
> some random thoughts:
> 
> nowadays hardware sector sizes are much bigger than 512 bytes

No :)

> and
> the read error may affect some sectors +- the sector which actually
> returned the error.

That's right

> 
> to keep the handling in userspace as much as possible: 
> 
> the real problem is the long resync time. therefore it would
> be sufficient to have a concept of "defective areas" per partition
> and drive (a few of them, perhaps four or so , would be enough) 
> which will be excluded from reads/writes and some means to
> re-synchronize these "defective areas" from the good counterparts
> of the other disk. This would avoid having the whole partition being
> marked as defective.

I wonder if it's really worth it.

The original idea has some merit I think - but what you're suggesting
here is almost "bad block remapping" with transparent recovery and user
space policy agents etc. etc.

If a drive has problems reading the platter, it can usually be corrected
by overwriting the given sector (either the drive can actually overwrite
the sector in place, or it will re-allocate it with severe read
performance penalties following). But there's a reason why that sector
went bad, and you realy want to get the disk replaced.

I think the current policy of marking the disk as failed when it has
failed is sensible.

Just my 0.02 Euro

-- 

 / jakob


  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-19 11:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-01-18 21:18 raid 1 - automatic 'repair' possible? Kiniger, Karl (GE Healthcare)
2005-01-18 21:46 ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2005-01-19 10:48   ` Kiniger
2005-01-19 11:55     ` Jakob Oestergaard [this message]
2005-01-28 16:39       ` Ric Wheeler
2005-01-31 16:01         ` Alan Cox

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=20050119115519.GY347@unthought.net \
    --to=jakob@unthought.net \
    --cc=karl.kiniger@med.ge.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lmb@suse.de \
    /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