Date: 07 Nov 2004 11:45:28 -0700 From: secmgr <security@jim-liesl.org> To: Joe Koberg <joe@osoft.us> Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: freebsd 5.3 have any problem with vinum ? Message-ID: <1099853128.4420.12.camel@emperor> In-Reply-To: <418E4F9C.4070109@osoft.us> References: <02f201c4ba91$f9f95db0$33017f80@psique> <20041103031316.A95136@titus.hanley.stade.co.uk> <41893F4D.6090702@jim-liesl.org> <200411061309.11883.msch@snafu.de> <1099805316.4420.2.camel@emperor> <418E4F9C.4070109@osoft.us>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It did, but can you tell me anywhere in the docs it says to do that? Or maybe that vinum should sense that and throw some error rather than just blindly corrupting itself. jim On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 09:38, Joe Koberg wrote: > secmgr wrote: > > > >No, I mean self corrupting raid5 sets during initialization. Discussed > >about 2-3 weeks ago. > > > > > In the following message you seemed to claim that adding 64 sectors of > slack to the > beginning of the vinum partition fixed this problem, as I suggested. Did > that fix it or not? > > > > The reason is empirically derived. When I created a 7 disk raid 5 set > > using "len 0" or all the space available, the raid set would be > > corrupt after initializing. Every time. When I reserved back that > > extra space, no corruption. > > (freebsd 4.10-p3) There was a thread on this a few days ago. > > > > jim > > > > Joe Koberg > joe at osoft dot us > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1099853128.4420.12.camel>