Hi, I have a new server HP proliant DL320 G4, with two 160 GB SATA hdds.. I have installed CentOS 4.5 with mdadm without any problem, but when I disconnect one disk the server does not boot or I received a kernel panic when booting... I have disabled the SATA embeded raid (BIOS) and nothing.. I've also download the driver from HP site HP (Embedded SATA RAID Controller Driver Diskette for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 (x86)). and nothing it does not recognize the driver from HP... does anybody knows how to setup a software linux RAID on a proliant DL320 G4?
thanks in advance regards, Israel
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of israel.garcia@cimex.com.cu
Hi, I have a new server HP proliant DL320 G4, with two 160 GB SATA hdds.. I have installed CentOS 4.5 with mdadm without any problem, but when I disconnect one disk the server does not boot or I received a kernel panic when booting... I have disabled the SATA embeded raid (BIOS) and nothing.. I've also download the driver from HP site HP (Embedded SATA RAID Controller Driver Diskette for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 (x86)). and nothing it does not recognize the driver from HP... does anybody knows how to setup a software linux RAID on a proliant DL320 G4?
It really doesn't have to do with the server manufacturer it is most likely your grub setup that is causing the problem.
Can you post a copy of your /etc/fstab, /boot/grub/menu.lst and /boot/grub/device.map?
When I setup my OS HD in a RAID1 I followed this recipe:
1) create 2 100MB MD partitions on each drive, create raid1 mirror of them, mount it /boot and make it ext3 fs.
2) create 2 MD partitions on each drive out of the remaining space, create a raid1 mirror of them, make the mirror an LVM PV.
3) create VG named CentOS out of PV
4) create 8GB LV called root, mount it / and make it ext3.
5) create 4GB LV called swap, formatted swap
6) create 16GB LV called home, mount it /home and make it ext3.
After install make sure grub is installed on both HDs.
device.map: # this device map was generated by anaconda (hd0) /dev/sda (hd1) /dev/sdb
# grub-install /dev/sda (if you booted then it is already on sda) # grub-install /dev/sdb
menu.lst: default=0 timeout=5 splashimage=(hd0,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz hiddenmenu title CentOS (2.6.18-8.1.8.el5) root (hd0,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.18-8.1.8.el5 ro root=/dev/CentOS/root initrd /initrd-2.6.18-8.1.8.el5.img
fstab: /dev/CentOS/root / ext3 defaults 1 1 /dev/md0 /boot ext3 defaults 1 2 /dev/CentOS/home /home ext3 defaults 1 3 devpts /dev/pts devpts gid=5,mode=620 0 0 tmpfs /dev/shm tmpfs defaults 0 0 proc /proc proc defaults 0 0 sysfs /sys sysfs defaults 0 0 /dev/CentOS/swap swap swap defaults 0 0
Now you can use a labels for /boot, to do so:
# e2label /dev/md0 boot
Then in fstab, replace the line starting with /dev/md0, with: LABEL=boot /boot ext3 defaults 1 2
-Ross
______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:38 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of israel.garcia@cimex.com.cu
<snip>
... does anybody knows how to setup a
software linux RAID on a proliant DL320 G4?
<snip>
When I setup my OS HD in a RAID1 I followed this recipe:
<snip>
- create 4GB LV called swap, formatted swap
OK. This particular item has aggravated me over many different posts and I've withstood the urge to holler "WHY"?
LVM adds another layer of (unnecessary) overhead. For swap to be usable, it must be formatted first, so it can't be expanded on-the-fly with LVM in use[1]. Further, expansion on-the-fly can be (effectively) accomplished by adding another partition or swap file (ugh! more unnecessary overhead) as needed when LVM is not in use.
Extra swap partitions/files can be easily enabled/disabled as desired on-the-fly without the extra overhead.
What's more, by having multiple swaps predefined and active at different priorities at boot-time, unexpected short-term surges in the use of swap can be gracefully accommodated. Since this requires no more space, has less overhead, is not dependent on anything other than primitive block device handling and seems to have as much flexibility and on-the-fly growth capability as one could want, I always asked "WHY?".
I am all ears (although it may not seem so) hoping to learn something new.
<snip>
[1] Although the mkswap man page discusses the formatting in minimal detail, it *appears* that a "tag" and bit-map of used blocks is needed/created when mkswap is run. If the vgextend command is used, after appropriate pvcreate functions, will the extension be properly formatted and used? Since you would not be adding a new swap partition/file, but extending an existing one, I suspect that the new space may go unused until a rerun of mkswap over the extended volume group is done, during which time the swap is not available at all. I don't know for sure and am too uninterested to research it that far when there seems no benefit from the use of LVM in the first place when all the potential benefits of LVM (only extensibility when in the context of swap) can be obtained other ways.
-- Bill
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:38 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of israel.garcia@cimex.com.cu
<snip>
... does anybody knows how to setup a
software linux RAID on a proliant DL320 G4?
<snip>
When I setup my OS HD in a RAID1 I followed this recipe:
<snip>
- create 4GB LV called swap, formatted swap
OK. This particular item has aggravated me over many different posts and I've withstood the urge to holler "WHY"?
LVM adds another layer of (unnecessary) overhead. For swap to be usable, it must be formatted first, so it can't be expanded on-the-fly with LVM in use[1]. Further, expansion on-the-fly can be (effectively) accomplished by adding another partition or swap file (ugh! more unnecessary overhead) as needed when LVM is not in use.
LVM is hardly any overhead at all.
You could always stop swap, and add more, or like you said create another swap LV and add it to the mix and later, and here is the important part, you can REMOVE the swap partition if it proves unneeded, OR you can stop swapping on it, reduce it, mkswap it and re-add it.
Extra swap partitions/files can be easily enabled/disabled as desired on-the-fly without the extra overhead.
Like I said there is no real overhead here, everything uses device-mapper and lvm is all device-mapper.
I have run extensive bench marks on block io on raw disks and block io on LVs and there was negligible differences maybe 10-20 IOPS on 10K+ IOPS operations.
What's more, by having multiple swaps predefined and active at different priorities at boot-time, unexpected short-term surges in the use of swap can be gracefully accommodated. Since this requires no more space, has less overhead, is not dependent on anything other than primitive block device handling and seems to have as much flexibility and on-the-fly growth capability as one could want, I always asked "WHY?".
It doesn't really, once the partitioning of the disk is done, IT IS SET IN STONE. Everything else you said is true whether your using phyical disk partitions or LVs.
I am all ears (although it may not seem so) hoping to learn something new.
Better storage management, better hardware abstraction, and in some cases when used with software raid, better performance, yes better performance as it provides for some more intelligent re-ordering of io requests pre-scheduler.
<snip>
[1] Although the mkswap man page discusses the formatting in minimal detail, it *appears* that a "tag" and bit-map of used blocks is needed/created when mkswap is run. If the vgextend command is used, after appropriate pvcreate functions, will the extension be properly formatted and used? Since you would not be adding a new swap partition/file, but extending an existing one, I suspect that the new space may go unused until a rerun of mkswap over the extended volume group is done, during which time the swap is not available at all. I don't know for sure and am too uninterested to research it that far when there seems no benefit from the use of LVM in the first place when all the potential benefits of LVM (only extensibility when in the context of swap) can be obtained other ways.
Who cares, stop swap, extend the LV and restart swap or just create a new LV add it and off you go.
In the future once grub can handle booting right into LVs there will be no more need for physical partitioning at all, create one big VG out of the system disk and allocate LVs.
Partitioning sucks.
-Ross
______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.
On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 17:27 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:38 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
<snip CentOS hdrs and some lead-in>
- create 4GB LV called swap, formatted swap
OK. This particular item has aggravated me over many different posts and I've withstood the urge to holler "WHY"?
LVM adds another layer of (unnecessary) overhead. For swap to be usable, it must be formatted first, so it can't be expanded on-the-fly with LVM in use[1]. Further, expansion on-the-fly can be (effectively) accomplished by adding another partition or swap file (ugh! more unnecessary overhead) as needed when LVM is not in use.
LVM is hardly any overhead at all.
I knew it wasn't much, from using it on 4.X and 5.0 and observing system responsiveness. Also, top seemed to confirm that overhead was not substantial.
Regardless, I operate on the premise that none is better than some unless there are substantial offsetting benefits (see below where you talk about the benefits of LVM).
You could always stop swap, and add more, or like you said create another swap LV and add it to the mix and later, and here is the important part, you can REMOVE the swap partition if it proves unneeded, OR you can stop swapping on it, reduce it, mkswap it and re-add it.
Yes. In my particular situation, I seldom have to reconfigure. Perhaps because I've been doing this so long and no longer have to worry about servicing others. So for me, these benefits a minimal and infrequently needed for swap. I have found the benefits of LVM (1 and 2) *very* handy for other file system needs as I'm always playing with CentOS (and LFS) to learn more. Naturally, "work expands to fill the space (and time) allotted" and I've frequently made use of LVM reconfiguration capabilities in addressing the effects of that. I especially liked the snapshot feature as I protected myself from the possible (likely?) brain-farts that can occur when I'm involved in throwing things around (again!).
<snip>
Better storage management, better hardware abstraction, and in some cases when used with software raid, better performance, yes better performance as it provides for some more intelligent re-ordering of io requests pre-scheduler.
I hadn't thought of that last item. It reminds me too that learning about some software raid (striping and mirroring) might be in order. Although my swap usage is very low (almost non-existent), having swap and other file systems striped might provide noticeable performance gains, in certain situations I encounter, and provide some more education for me.
<snip>
In the future once grub can handle booting right into LVs there will be no more need for physical partitioning at all, create one big VG out of the system disk and allocate LVs.
Other than the boot drive, which on my systems tend to be older, slower and smaller, I often have unpartitioned drives. I just make the file system on the raw device. I've not tried making an LVM on an unpartitioned drive yet, but I guess it ought to work. Another thing I'll be trying.
Partitioning sucks.
LOL. It seems that when a new needed facility comes that eases the tasks of someone, the previous facilities they had to use "sucked". Examples abound, like LILO vs. Grub. I still like and use LILO in some cases. I still like and use partitioning in some cases. If I were still working professionally and administering rapidly changing systems with large dynamic user bases and variable needs, I would certainly feel differently.
-Ross
<snip sig stuff>
Thanks for taking the time. I'll be playing with some of this on my CentOS 5.0 and LFS system(s). The faster one with SATA and IDE ports seems a good candidate, as it has nothing of importance on it.
Right now, I'm trying to figure out how to get decent graphic performance on that node. I recently installed the nvidia driver (tried to use the Rpmforge rpm, but the graphic card demanded the .96xx driver). Regardless, my 4.5 AMD 2200XP unit with a Radeon gets appx. 670 FPS, while the AMD 3200XP with the nvidia (and matching driver from nvidia's site) gets about 300 FPS. It's the same with the nv driver. I cured this on the 4.5 by using frame buffer, dri and some other things in the Xorg.conf. I've got to resolve this for the faster system.
Oh! Also, mplayer won't go full-screen with the nvidia driver, but will with the nv driver.
Anyway, that's all OT, so I'll close now.
Again, thanks for the interest.
-- Bill
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 10:42 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 17:27 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:38 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
<snip CentOS hdrs and some lead-in>
<snip>
Right now, I'm trying to figure out how to get decent graphic performance on that node. I recently installed the nvidia driver (tried to use the Rpmforge rpm, but the graphic card demanded the .96xx driver). Regardless, my 4.5 AMD 2200XP unit with a Radeon gets appx. 670 FPS, while the AMD 3200XP with the nvidia (and matching driver from nvidia's site) gets about 300 FPS. It's the same with the nv driver. I cured this on the 4.5 by using frame buffer, dri and some other things in the Xorg.conf. I've got to resolve this for the faster system.
BTW, on the slower system, IIRC, the FPS was in the mid 30s, not 300.
<snip>
-- Bill
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 10:42 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 17:27 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:38 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
<snip CentOS hdrs and some lead-in>
<snip>
Right now, I'm trying to figure out how to get decent graphic performance on that node. I recently installed the nvidia
driver (tried
to use the Rpmforge rpm, but the graphic card demanded the .96xx driver). Regardless, my 4.5 AMD 2200XP unit with a Radeon
gets appx. 670
FPS, while the AMD 3200XP with the nvidia (and matching driver from nvidia's site) gets about 300 FPS. It's the same with the
nv driver. I
cured this on the 4.5 by using frame buffer, dri and some
other things
in the Xorg.conf. I've got to resolve this for the faster system.
BTW, on the slower system, IIRC, the FPS was in the mid 30s, not 300.
I believe with the nvidias you can't have compositing and glx at the same time unless you add this option:
Option "AllowGLXWithComposite" "True"
In your graphics card section. I believe it is the GL off-loading that is giving you the premo FPS.
-Ross
______________________________________________________________________ This e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copy or printout thereof.
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 20:33 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Mon, 2007-09-03 at 10:42 -0400, William L. Maltby wrote:
On Sun, 2007-09-02 at 17:27 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
From: centos-bounces@centos.org [mailto:centos-bounces@centos.org] On Behalf Of William L. Maltby
On Wed, 2007-08-29 at 16:38 -0400, Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
><snip CentOS hdrs and some lead-in>
<snip>
Right now, I'm trying to figure out how to get decent graphic performance on that node. I recently installed the nvidia
driver (tried
to use the Rpmforge rpm, but the graphic card demanded the .96xx driver). Regardless, my 4.5 AMD 2200XP unit with a Radeon
gets appx. 670
FPS, while the AMD 3200XP with the nvidia (and matching driver from nvidia's site) gets about 300 FPS. It's the same with the
nv driver. I
cured this on the 4.5 by using frame buffer, dri and some
other things
in the Xorg.conf. I've got to resolve this for the faster system.
BTW, on the slower system, IIRC, the FPS was in the mid 30s, not 300.
I believe with the nvidias you can't have compositing and glx at the same time unless you add this option:
Option "AllowGLXWithComposite" "True"In your graphics card section. I believe it is the GL off-loading that is giving you the premo FPS.
Thanks. I'll give that a try this weekend (I hope). Been doing some long hours at work and all my recreational time seems to be spent sleeping!
-Ross
<snip sig stuff>
-- Bill
mdadm is for software raid. You are speaking about hardware raid : Embedded SATA RAID Controller !
If you have an onboard raid controller, you have first to create a "Volume" using the HP utilities (this is in the bios or when booting on a CD) Then when installing Centos you should see the Volume you have created. If not try using the Driver Diskette.
Regards
Alain
On 8/29/07, israel.garcia@cimex.com.cu israel.garcia@cimex.com.cu wrote:
Hi, I have a new server HP proliant DL320 G4, with two 160 GB SATA hdds.. I have installed CentOS 4.5 with mdadm without any problem, but when I disconnect one disk the server does not boot or I received a kernel panic when booting... I have disabled the SATA embeded raid (BIOS) and nothing.. I've also download the driver from HP site HP (Embedded SATA RAID Controller Driver Diskette for Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4 (x86)). and nothing it does not recognize the driver from HP... does anybody knows how to setup a software linux RAID on a proliant DL320 G4?
thanks in advance regards, Israel
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
-
Alain Spineux -
israel.garcia＠cimex.com.cu -
Ross S. W. Walker -
William L. Maltby