similar to: Megacli, NetCat, and Virt-Install Test Suites Released

On Fri, May 6, 2016 1:36 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the > firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 or > 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and rebooted the > system. > > And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. > >

On Fri, May 6, 2016 4:19 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Valeri Galtsev wrote: >> >> On Fri, May 6, 2016 1:36 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >>> Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the >>> firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 >>> or 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said

I am having an issue with Megacli when adding or removing virtual disks. I will post a link to fpaste that has the issue shown. In brief whenever i add, or remove, a virtual disk via MegaCli the attempt succeeds and the adapter is configured but the OS remounts dm-0 in read only. dm-0 is my root lv. This issue does not happen if i boot into the default, non Xen, CentOS kernel. On stock

Valeri Galtsev wrote: > > On Fri, May 6, 2016 1:36 pm, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: >> Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the >> firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 >> or 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and >> rebooted the system. >> >> And the stupid

Hi Valeri, Before you pull a drive you should check to make sure that doing so won't kill the whole array. MegaCli can help you prevent a storage disaster and can let you have more insight into your RAID and the status of the virtual disks and the disks than make up each array. MegaCli will let you see the health and status of each drive. Does it have media errors, is it in predictive

On 5/6/2016 11:36 AM, m.roth at 5-cent.us wrote: > Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the > firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 or > 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and rebooted the > system. > > And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. > > This

On Fri, January 20, 2017 7:00 pm, Cameron Smith wrote: > Hi Valeri, > > > Before you pull a drive you should check to make sure that doing so > won't kill the whole array. Wow! What did I say to make you treat me as an ultimate idiot!? ;-) All my comments, at least in my own reading, we about things you need to do to make sure when you hot unplug bad drive it is indeed failed

Got a new box I'm trying to set up. I configured the RAID from the firmware, but "fast initialize" was sitting there at 0% (it's about 43 or 45TB). The first time I tried this, I said background, and rebooted the system. And the stupid annoying alarm started up as the system came up. This time, having *finally* figured out how to set up hot spares from the WebBIOS, I suspended

On 1/30/2015 9:44 AM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 1/29/2015 7:21 PM, Jatin Davey wrote: >> [root at localhost ~]# lspci | grep RAID >> 05:00.0 RAID bus controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic MegaRAID SAS-3 >> 3108 [Invader] (rev 02) > > to get info out of those, you need to install MegaCli64 from LSI > Logic, which has the ugliest command lines and output you've

Roland Mainz wrote: > April Chin wrote: > > I''m in the process of filing manpage bugs for ksh93 to include > > changes to existing pages and new manpages for ksh93(1) and its > > builtins (builtin(1), disown(1)). > > > > CR 6457823 New manpages needed for ksh93 > > > > However, I do not see any manpages for vmap(1), alarm(1), or vpath(1). >

On 2/16/2016 3:23 PM, Zube wrote: > Does anyone know what program can be used to query the RAID status > from the OS for an on-board LSI SAS 2308-4i? the 2308 isn't actually a megaraid, its a simple SAS HBA that has an optional raid mode IF its flashed with IR firmware... this only supports raid 0/1/10. I always(!) flash these with the IT firmware that turns them back into a

I submitted the problem report to clang's bugzilla but no one seems to care so I have to send it to the mailing list. clang 3.7 svn (trunk 229055 as the time I was to report this problem) generates slower code than 3.5 (Apple LLVM version 6.0 (clang-600.0.56) (based on LLVM 3.5svn)) for the following code. It is a "8 queens puzzle" solver written as an educational example. As

The regressions in the performance of generated code, introduced by the llvm 3.6 release, don't seem to be limited to this 8 queens puzzle" solver test case. See... http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=llvm-clang-3.5-3.6-rc1&num=1 where a bit hit in the performance of the Sparse Matrix Multiply test of the SciMark v2.0 benchmark was observed as well as others.

On 1/29/2015 7:21 PM, Jatin Davey wrote: > [root at localhost ~]# lspci | grep RAID > 05:00.0 RAID bus controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic MegaRAID SAS-3 > 3108 [Invader] (rev 02) to get info out of those, you need to install MegaCli64 from LSI Logic, which has the ugliest command lines and output you've ever seen. I use the python script below, which I put in

Using the SciMark 2.0 code from http://math.nist.gov/scimark2/scimark2_1c.zip compiled with the same... make CFLAGS="-O3 -march=native" I am able to reproduce the 22% performance regression in the run time of the Sparse matmult benchmark. For 10 runs of the scimark2 benechmark, I get 998.439+/-0.4828 with the release llvm clang 3.5.1 compiler and 1217.363+/-1.1004 for the current

Recently LLD made it to the front page of HN (yay!): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13670458 This comment about the Solaris linker surprised me: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13672364 """ > To me, the biggest advantage is cross compiling Not all system linkers have this problem. For example, Solaris ld(1) is perfectly capable of cross-linking any valid ELF file.

Here is my thought process on why the application crashes with a protection violation reading a section of memory. I used IDA to disassemble the app. Here's the section where it reads from memory and crashes because of a protection violation: 00760D4A sub_760D4A proc near ; CODE XREF: sub_75FCB0+159^Xp 00760D4A push ebp 00760D4B mov

On 2/2/2015 10:32 AM, John R Pierce wrote: > On 2/1/2015 8:25 PM, Jatin Davey wrote: >> >> On 2/2/2015 9:25 AM, John R Pierce wrote: >>> On 2/1/2015 7:31 PM, Jatin Davey wrote: >>>> >>>> I ran your script and here is the output for it: >>>> >>>> Start of the Output*************************** >>>> [root at localhost

Hi. We have been using samba 3.0.11 for years and now we need to add some win7 machines to our domain. So I test up-to-date Samba versions (3.6.19, 4.1.0 compiled, and Centos today "native" binary package 3.6.something) and with all of them I run into the same problem. I get stuck with protocols when checking XP machines (which works like a charm in 3.0.11 domain) When max protocol is

Hey, anyone using an LSI MegaRAID experienced "disappearing drives"...? We installed 6 new C6 servers, each with a Supermicro SMC2108 (LSI MegaRAID) controllers and 3 PX-128M5Pro SSDs ( RAID1 + hostswap). 2 weeks (and almost no activity on it, since not in production, apart from installation) later, megacli sees (based on the slot numbers): - on one server: only the 2nd disk of the RAID