Subject: Re: raidframe/raid reliability
To: Dan J Fraser <dfraser@capybara.org>
From: Herb Peyerl <hpeyerl@beer.org>
List: port-i386
Date: 04/13/2000 06:16:15
Dan J Fraser <dfraser@capybara.org> wrote:
> I need to colocate a machine and have it be somewhat reliable. So, I was
> thinking I should put two drives in it, and use RAIDframe with level 1.
>
> The reliability level I want is this: If a drive dies, the machine should
> keep working until I can get on-site and fix it. It doesn't have to be
> hotswap, etc... A few minutes of downtime for a driveswap/reboot is fine,
> but a few hours of downtime while I drive to the facility is not fine.
I use raidframe with level 5 on a machine in stockholm and it does that
for me. I haven't played with '1'. I don't even shut the machine down
when a drive fails, but then I'm a little more daring. Replace the disk
with another identical one and then run 'scsictl scan'.
of course, you have to watch the msgbuf to see if a drive has gone bad.