Re: FYI: RAID5 unusably unstable through 2.6.14

[Martin Drab]

On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Martin Drab wrote:

> On Fri, 3 Feb 2006, Phillip Susi wrote:
> 
> > Usually drives will fail reads to bad sectors but when you write to that
> > sector, it will write and read that sector to see if it is fine after being
> > written again, or if the media is bad in which case it will remap the sector
> > to a spare. 
> 
> No, I don't think this was the case of a physically bad sectors. I think 
> it was just an inconsistency of the RAID controllers metadata (or 
> something simillar) related to that particular array.

Or is such a situation not possible at all? Are bad sectors the only 
reason that might have caused this? That sounds a little strange to me, 
that would have been a very unlikely concentration of conincidences, IMO. 
That's why I still think there are no bad sectors at all (at least not 
because of this). Is there any way to actually find out?

Martin
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/