From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 27 12:02:53 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B627316A41F for ; Sun, 27 May 2007 12:02:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kalin@el.net) Received: from mail.el.net (mail.el.net [74.2.36.130]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16BF313C44C for ; Sun, 27 May 2007 12:02:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kalin@el.net) Received: (qmail 95924 invoked by uid 1008); 27 May 2007 12:03:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.el.net) (127.0.0.1) by mail.el.net with SMTP; 27 May 2007 12:03:39 -0000 Received: from 74.64.6.149 (SquirrelMail authenticated user kalin@el.net) by mail.el.net with HTTP; Sun, 27 May 2007 08:03:39 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <51745.74.64.6.149.1180267419.squirrel@mail.el.net> In-Reply-To: References: <62361.74.64.6.149.1180048287.squirrel@mail.el.net> Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 08:03:39 -0400 (EDT) From: "kalin mintchev" To: "Ted Mittelstaedt" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal Cc: rsmith@xs4all.nl, kalin@el.net, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: RE: raid or not raid X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: kalin@el.net List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 12:02:53 -0000 > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >> [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of kalin mintchev >> Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 4:11 PM >> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org >> Cc: rsmith@xs4all.nl >> Subject: Re: raid or not raid >> >> >> > On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 06:30:06AM -0400, kalin mintchev wrote: >> >> >> >> so nobody on this list knows anything about raid? >> >> wrong list? >> >> >> >> > hi all.. >> >> > >> >> > i have a box in a remote hosting facility that claims that >> the machine >> >> has >> >> > two discs raided in it but df and fstab show only one disc with a >> >> bunch of >> >> > slices. >> >> > under devices there is another name - ad6 - but it's not mounted >> >> anywhere. >> >> > the one i see both in df and the fstab is ad4 with one big slice >> and >> >> > different partitions.... >> > >> > My (VIA Tech V-RAID) raid disk shows up as ar0, although the ad4 and >> ad6 >> > device nodes exist as well. >> > >> > Do you have the ataraid device in the kernel? >> >> yes. but isn;t that in by default in 5.4 GENERIC?! >> >> >> > they insist there are 2 raided discs in tha machine. the os >> is 5.4 and >> >> i >> >> > think at that point the raid drivers were still considered >> >> > 'experimental'. >> > >> > Then ask them how it's done. >> > >> >> > it makes sense to me that if i don't see a second drive in the >> fstab >> >> there >> >> > isn;t any mounting which means that there is no raid going on... >> > >> > If you're seeing an ad device, it's not RAID-ed, AFAIK. >> > >> >> > is there any other way i can make sure if raid is actually on? >> >> > would there will be any logs somewhere? >> >> > the machine has been up for about 2 years and the dmesg is long >> >> gone... >> > >> > It should be in /var/run/dmesg.boot. >> >> thanks. i guess that solves the ad6 mistery: >> >> atapci0: port >> 0xfc00-0xfc0f,0x376,0x170-0x177,0x3f6,0x1f0-0x1f7 at device 31.1 on pci0 >> ata0: channel #0 on atapci0 >> ata1: channel #1 on atapci0 >> atapci1: port >> 0xcc80-0xcc8f,0xcc98-0xcc9b,0xcca0-0xcca7,0xccb0-0xccb3,0xccb8-0xccbf >> irq >> 18 at device 31.2 on pci0 >> ata2: channel #0 on atapci1 >> ata3: channel #1 on atapci1 >> ..................................................... >> ad4: 152587MB [310019/16/63] at >> ata2-master >> SATA150 >> ad6: 152587MB [310019/16/63] at >> ata3-master >> SATA150 >> Mounting root from ufs:/dev/ad4s1a >> >> unless "at device 31.2 on pci0" points to some RAID evidence - which i >> think it's false - than i read this as the ad6 disk sits there unused. >> am i right?! >> >> according to pciconf the atapci0 and atapci1 are differnt conrollers - >> EIDE and SATA so they can both be on pci0 as 31.1 and 31.2?! still no >> RAID >> though... >> > > I've come late to this thread but it's been interesting watching the > speculation. > > Yes, they F'd up the installation. Badly. But you need to back up every > scrap of data before trying to fix it. And use FBSD 6.2 on the next one. > There's been lots of driver fixes in the ata driver that you want. > > ata raid should show all your data on AR not AD!! Here's an example > from my mailserver: > > mail# cat /etc/fstab > # Device Mountpoint FStype Options Dump > Pass# > /dev/ar0s1b none swap sw 0 0 > /dev/ar0s1a / ufs rw 1 1 > /dev/ar0s1e /usr ufs rw 2 2 > /dev/ar0s1d /var ufs rw 2 2 > /dev/acd0 /cdrom cd9660 ro,noauto 0 0 > mail# > > Also, note the following. VERY important! > > When you go to setup a RAID mirror on a system, using a UDMA or SATA > controller, > (ie: NOT using a RAID5 card or SCSI card or some such) here is what you > do. > > Start by going into the system RAID BIOS on boot, setup your RAID, then > boot the install disk. Disks ad4 and ad6 will always show. If disk ar0 > also shows, you can select ar0 and install to that. > > IF DISK ar0 DOES NOT SHOW, then your BIOS "metadata" isn't compatible. > STOP. > Reboot system. GO into BIOS. DESELECT and DISABLE the RAID. > > Boot system with install CD. At the screen that displays ad4 and ad6, > select > ad4. Select Minimal install. Don't bother answering any post install > questions. > Finish install. Reboot and login to root. At command line, issue > command: > > atacontrol create RAID1 ad4 ad6 > > Immediately reboot from the install CD. Now, at the disk selection screen > you will see ar0. Select this. Delete all existing partitions and > recreate > them, install the full system and your in business. nice... thank you. i love condensed instructions. saves so much time... > Ted > >