Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757953AbXLaJzG (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Dec 2007 04:55:06 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753631AbXLaJy4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Dec 2007 04:54:56 -0500 Received: from smtp3-g19.free.fr ([212.27.42.29]:55779 "EHLO smtp3-g19.free.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753539AbXLaJyz (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Dec 2007 04:54:55 -0500 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.2.5.060620 Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 10:54:52 +0100 Subject: Re: RAID timeout parameter accessibility request From: Jose de la Mancha To: Message-ID: Thread-Topic: RAID timeout parameter accessibility request Thread-Index: AchLkzAjbm21IbeGEdyZCAADk7o1Ig== In-Reply-To: <4778256E.5000309@shaw.ca> Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1673 Lines: 39 Thanks guys for your answers (please remember to keep CCing me). Robert Hancock wrote: > This always seemed a strange use case to me. If the drive is getting > read errors, either it's dying and needs to be replaced, or it has a > sporadic bad sector as a result of a power failure during write, etc. in > which case the drive should be resynchronized. In either case the drive > should be dropped from the array and require manual intervention. It > doesn't seem logical to me to just read the data from another drive and > carry on in our merry way without any warning. --> A warning message is OK, but dropping the drive from the array is excessive IMHO. And anyway, this should be user-configurable, so that it becomes each user's responsibility to choose if the drive shall be dropped or not. Currently we don't have any choice. Jan Engelhardt wrote: > Not sure about Debian, but perhaps /sys/block/md0/md/safe_mode_delay > does something? --> I'll check that out. Does someone know about how this "safe mode delay" works ? Thanasis wrote: > WD 2500YS > price same as an IDE or SATA --> All RAID edition drives are more expensive that their equivalent "desktop edition" drives (same model on "desktop edition"). Just take a look at newegg for instance. Besides, trying to find an affordable "RAID edition" model is not a solution to this technical timeout issue, just a workaraound (a bad one IMHO). Thanks anyway. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/