Subject: Re: raidframe: failed to allocate emergency buffer!
To: Alan Barrett <apb@cequrux.com>
From: Daniel Carosone <dan@geek.com.au>
List: current-users
Date: 06/03/2004 21:09:04
--cmJC7u66zC7hs+87
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 10:51:04AM +0200, Alan Barrett wrote:
> size constraints, and the fact that you use RAID1 for everything, I
> estimate that you need 30 to 50 file systems, which will fit on 3 or 4
> RAID devices.
Except of course you'll probably want a multiple of 3 raid devices,
for even splitting of 6 disks with raid1, so 6 it is for convenience.
Still a far cry from 48 :)
Beware that, with multiple raid pseudo devices on the same physical
disk, parallel fsck will suck, because fsck looks at the device names
and assumes they're independent disks, but they're not underneath.
--
Dan.
--cmJC7u66zC7hs+87
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (NetBSD)
iD8DBQFAvwbQEAVxvV4N66cRApZCAKDdd17ETLuSgBMP0RwqCKNEg20zUQCfQNCF
mpbXhUq1+2C2r3+GuYkvsxM=
=ynwp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--cmJC7u66zC7hs+87--