Re: question on vinum
From: secmgr (security_at_jim-liesl.org)
Date: 10/27/04
- Previous message: Peter Ulrich Kruppa: "RE: ppp -nat broken???"
- In reply to: Marko Raiha: "Re: question on vinum"
- Next in thread: Marko Raiha: "Re: question on vinum"
- Reply: Marko Raiha: "Re: question on vinum"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2004 09:10:39 -0600 To: Marko Raiha <mjraiha@fade.pp.fi>
Marko Raiha wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Tue, Oct 26, 2004 at 11:33:43PM -0600, secmgr wrote:
>
>
>>...
>>when you define the subdisk, don't use the whole drive. Leave at least
>>64 blocks unused.
>>...
>>
>>
>
>Would you mind to tell the reason behind this rule of leaving at least
>64 blocks unused?
>
>Regards,
>
>
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
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Peter Ulrich Kruppa: "RE: ppp -nat broken???"
- In reply to: Marko Raiha: "Re: question on vinum"
- Next in thread: Marko Raiha: "Re: question on vinum"
- Reply: Marko Raiha: "Re: question on vinum"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|