|
View:
New views
20 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
|
|
raid10??hi all,
i'm setting up a new server and i basically have 4 disks (+2 for back-up storage), easiest would be to go for the good old raid5 and suffer the performance loss, but i have some time left to do some benchmarking and i want to give raid10 a try. i don't seem to be able to find much resources on google about setting up raid 10 in debian (anybody has some experience???) and i also came accross the idea of raid1 with lvm setup..is this an option? just wandering if somebody has some thoughts and pointers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??On 28.01.08 15:03, randall wrote:
> i'm setting up a new server and i basically have 4 disks (+2 for back-up > storage), easiest would be to go for the good old raid5 and suffer the > performance loss, but i have some time left to do some benchmarking and > i want to give raid10 a try. > > i don't seem to be able to find much resources on google about setting > up raid 10 in debian (anybody has some experience???) > and i also came accross the idea of raid1 with lvm setup..is this an option? > > > just wandering if somebody has some thoughts and pointers I currently run raid0 over raid1. Someone mentioned that I'm lucky because due to some problem this configuration may fail. Well, I'm lucky yet... I noticed there is raid10 driver in kernel, but I haven't looked carefully over that yet. Currently I have 2 types of disks (2 disks of each) connected through 2 SATA cards (each card has one disk of one type and one disk of another type), mirroring one disk of one type on one cars with one disk of another type on another card, so if one of cards or both disks of one type fail, I'm still not loosing any data... I would like to have raid10 with the same configuration. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@... ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. Your mouse has moved. Windows NT will now restart for changes to take to take effect. [OK] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > I currently run raid0 over raid1. Someone mentioned that I'm lucky because > due to some problem this configuration may fail. Well, I'm lucky yet... > This makes no sense to me. Why not just pair off the disks in raid1 arrays and then make them all PVs in an LVM setup? Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com |
|
|
Re: raid10??> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote:
> > > > I currently run raid0 over raid1. Someone mentioned that I'm lucky because > > due to some problem this configuration may fail. Well, I'm lucky yet... On 28.01.08 11:23, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > This makes no sense to me. Why not just pair off the disks in raid1 > arrays and then make them all PVs in an LVM setup? because I wanted to skip the LVM part. I have no need for LVM yet... -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@... ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. It's now safe to throw off your computer. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??Le Monday 28 January 2008 17:30:05 Matus UHLAR - fantomas, vous avez écrit :
> > On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: > > > I currently run raid0 over raid1. Someone mentioned that I'm lucky > > > because due to some problem this configuration may fail. Well, I'm > > > lucky yet... > > On 28.01.08 11:23, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > > This makes no sense to me. Why not just pair off the disks in raid1 > > arrays and then make them all PVs in an LVM setup? > > because I wanted to skip the LVM part. I have no need for LVM yet... =>lvm stripping across two raid1 arrays. |
|
|
Re: raid10??Gilles Mocellin wrote:
> Le Monday 28 January 2008 17:30:05 Matus UHLAR - fantomas, vous avez écrit : >>> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >>>> I currently run raid0 over raid1. Someone mentioned that I'm lucky >>>> because due to some problem this configuration may fail. Well, I'm >>>> lucky yet... >> On 28.01.08 11:23, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >>> This makes no sense to me. Why not just pair off the disks in raid1 >>> arrays and then make them all PVs in an LVM setup? >> because I wanted to skip the LVM part. I have no need for LVM yet... > > But LVM stripping (lvcreate -i) will add you the RAID0 part of your RAID10 ! > =>lvm stripping across two raid1 arrays. i have just installed with the debian installer making 2 x raid1 and then glueing them together with LVM 256 MB /boot raid 1 (on all 4 disks) 10 GB /root raid1 + lvm 1 GB /swap raid1 + lvm 500 GB unused raid1 + lvm (i wasn't very sure what to do about the swap but i think this means slower but securer in a case of crashing) till so far the performance feels pretty snappy but i still have to do some benchmarking and remove a few random disks to see what happens. anybody ever reliably used a set up like this in production? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:13:10PM +0100, Matus UHLAR - fantomas wrote: >> I currently run raid0 over raid1. Someone mentioned that I'm lucky because >> due to some problem this configuration may fail. Well, I'm lucky yet... >> > This makes no sense to me. Why not just pair off the disks in raid1 > arrays and then make them all PVs in an LVM setup? to have control and optimize the speed? afaik, raid 10 is used primarily for performance, not space consolidation, or safety only. > > Regards, > > -Roberto > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??> > On 28.01.08 11:23, Roberto C. Sánchez wrote:
> > > This makes no sense to me. Why not just pair off the disks in raid1 > > > arrays and then make them all PVs in an LVM setup? > > because I wanted to skip the LVM part. I have no need for LVM yet... On 28.01.08 20:23, Gilles Mocellin wrote: > But LVM stripping (lvcreate -i) will add you the RAID0 part of your RAID10 ! > =>lvm stripping across two raid1 arrays. read again the "skip the LVM part" please. -- Matus UHLAR - fantomas, uhlar@... ; http://www.fantomas.sk/ Warning: I wish NOT to receive e-mail advertising to this address. Varovanie: na tuto adresu chcem NEDOSTAVAT akukolvek reklamnu postu. "They say when you play that M$ CD backward you can hear satanic messages." "That's nothing. If you play it forward it will install Windows." -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:23:25AM +0100, randall wrote:
> > i have just installed with the debian installer making 2 x raid1 and > then glueing them together with LVM > 256 MB /boot raid 1 (on all 4 disks) > 10 GB /root raid1 + lvm > 1 GB /swap raid1 + lvm > 500 GB unused raid1 + lvm > > (i wasn't very sure what to do about the swap but i think this means > slower but securer in a case of crashing) > > till so far the performance feels pretty snappy but i still have to do > some benchmarking and remove a few random disks to see what happens. > > anybody ever reliably used a set up like this in production? > Then I create a LVM volume group, adding both /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 as physical volumes. Then I create whatever logical volumes I want. It works very well. Regards, -Roberto -- Roberto C. Sánchez http://people.connexer.com/~roberto http://www.connexer.com |
|
|
Re: raid10??With mdadm you can make RAID10, is there a problem here I just don't see?
my mdadm.conf has this for one server with 4 500GB disks, md0 is 1 TB. ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid10 num-devices=4 UUID=9fbd86dc:518e4bf3:c0ae5f04:5c65c500 Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: > On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:23:25AM +0100, randall wrote: > >> i have just installed with the debian installer making 2 x raid1 and >> then glueing them together with LVM >> 256 MB /boot raid 1 (on all 4 disks) >> 10 GB /root raid1 + lvm >> 1 GB /swap raid1 + lvm >> 500 GB unused raid1 + lvm >> >> (i wasn't very sure what to do about the swap but i think this means >> slower but securer in a case of crashing) >> >> till so far the performance feels pretty snappy but i still have to do >> some benchmarking and remove a few random disks to see what happens. >> >> anybody ever reliably used a set up like this in production? >> >> > I run a similar setup on many production servers. On one, for example, > I have four disks. I create two RAID1 arrays, /dev/md0 and /dev/md1. > Then I create a LVM volume group, adding both /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 as > physical volumes. Then I create whatever logical volumes I want. It > works very well. > > Regards, > > -Roberto > > -- Hector Gonzalez cacho@... http://www.genac.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??Héctor González wrote:
> With mdadm you can make RAID10, is there a problem here I just don't see? > > my mdadm.conf has this for one server with 4 500GB disks, md0 is 1 TB. > > ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid10 num-devices=4 > UUID=9fbd86dc:518e4bf3:c0ae5f04:5c65c500 > > > Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:23:25AM +0100, randall wrote: >> >>> i have just installed with the debian installer making 2 x raid1 and >>> then glueing them together with LVM >>> 256 MB /boot raid 1 (on all 4 disks) >>> 10 GB /root raid1 + lvm >>> 1 GB /swap raid1 + lvm >>> 500 GB unused raid1 + lvm >>> >>> (i wasn't very sure what to do about the swap but i think this means >>> slower but securer in a case of crashing) >>> >>> till so far the performance feels pretty snappy but i still have to do >>> some benchmarking and remove a few random disks to see what happens. >>> >>> anybody ever reliably used a set up like this in production? >>> >>> >> I run a similar setup on many production servers. On one, for example, >> I have four disks. I create two RAID1 arrays, /dev/md0 and /dev/md1. >> Then I create a LVM volume group, adding both /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 as >> physical volumes. Then I create whatever logical volumes I want. It >> works very well. >> >> Regards, >> >> -Roberto >> >> > > and i was just about to try that way, any pointers about the install you are willing to share? should be something as follows i figured, can you include /boot this way? sfdisk -d /dev/hda | sfdisk /dev/hdb etc...... mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[ab]1 mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[cd]1 mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/md[01] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??randall wrote:
> Héctor González wrote: > >> With mdadm you can make RAID10, is there a problem here I just don't see? >> >> my mdadm.conf has this for one server with 4 500GB disks, md0 is 1 TB. >> >> ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid10 num-devices=4 >> UUID=9fbd86dc:518e4bf3:c0ae5f04:5c65c500 >> >> >> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:23:25AM +0100, randall wrote: >>> >>> >>>> i have just installed with the debian installer making 2 x raid1 and >>>> then glueing them together with LVM >>>> 256 MB /boot raid 1 (on all 4 disks) >>>> 10 GB /root raid1 + lvm >>>> 1 GB /swap raid1 + lvm >>>> 500 GB unused raid1 + lvm >>>> >>>> (i wasn't very sure what to do about the swap but i think this means >>>> slower but securer in a case of crashing) >>>> >>>> till so far the performance feels pretty snappy but i still have to do >>>> some benchmarking and remove a few random disks to see what happens. >>>> >>>> anybody ever reliably used a set up like this in production? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> I run a similar setup on many production servers. On one, for example, >>> I have four disks. I create two RAID1 arrays, /dev/md0 and /dev/md1. >>> Then I create a LVM volume group, adding both /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 as >>> physical volumes. Then I create whatever logical volumes I want. It >>> works very well. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> -Roberto >>> >>> >>> >> > no problem, just some time left to try out different options ;) > > and i was just about to try that way, any pointers about the install you > are willing to share? > > should be something as follows i figured, can you include /boot this way? > > sfdisk -d /dev/hda | sfdisk /dev/hdb etc...... > > mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[ab]1 > mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[cd]1 > mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/md[01] > > > > mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sd[bcde]1 I don't boot currently from that raid, but it should work fine, if you told the mdadm package to include boot raid support. -- Hector Gonzalez cacho@... http://www.genac.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??also sprach Héctor González <cacho@...> [2008.01.30.0600 +1100]:
> Well, if memory doesn't fail, I just did something like: > > mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sd[bcde]1 This has the advantage that access to the disk only has to traverse the md layer once. It works, I use it almost everywhere. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@...> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems die wahrheit ist selten auf seiten der wahrscheinlichkeit. -- heinrich v. kleist |
|
|
Re: raid10??Sorry forgot the list ;-)
martin f krafft schrieb: > also sprach Héctor González <cacho@...> [2008.01.30.0600 +1100]: > >> Well, if memory doesn't fail, I just did something like: >> >> mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sd[bcde]1 >> > > This has the advantage that access to the disk only has to traverse > the md layer once. It works, I use it almost everywhere. > > Is this also possible while debian installation? Can one boot from this raid? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-isp-REQUEST@... with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@... |
|
|
Re: raid10??also sprach Andre Keller <mluser@...> [2008.01.30.1923 +1100]:
> Sorry forgot the list ;-) Please don't Cc people when replying to lists. > Is this also possible while debian installation? Can one boot from this > raid? Not yet, at least not with the Debian installer. -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@...> : :' : proud Debian developer, author, administrator, and user `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck - http://debiansystem.info `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems "... and so he killed Miguel in a rit of fealous jage." -- inspector clouseau |
|
|
Re: raid10??Héctor González wrote:
> randall wrote: >> Héctor González wrote: >> >>> With mdadm you can make RAID10, is there a problem here I just don't see? >>> >>> my mdadm.conf has this for one server with 4 500GB disks, md0 is 1 TB. >>> >>> ARRAY /dev/md0 level=raid10 num-devices=4 >>> UUID=9fbd86dc:518e4bf3:c0ae5f04:5c65c500 >>> >>> >>> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Jan 29, 2008 at 05:23:25AM +0100, randall wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>>> i have just installed with the debian installer making 2 x raid1 and >>>>> then glueing them together with LVM >>>>> 256 MB /boot raid 1 (on all 4 disks) >>>>> 10 GB /root raid1 + lvm >>>>> 1 GB /swap raid1 + lvm >>>>> 500 GB unused raid1 + lvm >>>>> >>>>> (i wasn't very sure what to do about the swap but i think this means >>>>> slower but securer in a case of crashing) >>>>> >>>>> till so far the performance feels pretty snappy but i still have to do >>>>> some benchmarking and remove a few random disks to see what happens. >>>>> >>>>> anybody ever reliably used a set up like this in production? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I run a similar setup on many production servers. On one, for example, >>>> I have four disks. I create two RAID1 arrays, /dev/md0 and /dev/md1. >>>> Then I create a LVM volume group, adding both /dev/md0 and /dev/md1 as >>>> physical volumes. Then I create whatever logical volumes I want. It >>>> works very well. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> -Roberto >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >> no problem, just some time left to try out different options ;) >> >> and i was just about to try that way, any pointers about the install you >> are willing to share? >> >> should be something as follows i figured, can you include /boot this way? >> >> sfdisk -d /dev/hda | sfdisk /dev/hdb etc...... >> >> mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[ab]1 >> mdadm --create /dev/md1 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[cd]1 >> mdadm --create /dev/md2 --level=0 --raid-devices=2 /dev/md[01] >> >> >> >> > Well, if memory doesn't fail, I just did something like: > > mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=raid10 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sd[bcde]1 > > I don't boot currently from that raid, but it should work fine, if you > told the mdadm package to include boot raid support. > i tried to follow the how-to-forge article on raid1 installation for a running system, replacing it with raid10. this seems to work nicely, attached my notes based on the original article. until the very last final step that is, getting the final raid10 to boot, i'm not having much luck with grub, i'm receiving grub error 2 at the moment for all 4 disks. before i continue on this path i want to ask if it is possible at all. md0 /root md1 /swap md2 /data so all 3 as RAID10 and no seperate /boot so here's the question. 1 this is possible and am i just to big a noob to get the correct grub parameters 2 this is not possible so i should use a seperate /boot in raid1 How To Set Up Software RAID1 On A Running System (Incl. GRUB Configuration) (Debian Etch) Version 1.0 Author: Falko Timme <ft [at] falkotimme [dot] com> Last edited 11/26/2007 This guide explains how to set up software RAID1 on an already running Debian Etch system. The GRUB bootloader will be configured in such a way that the system will still be able to boot if one of the hard drives fails (no matter which one). I do not issue any guarantee that this will work for you! 1 Preliminary Note In this tutorial I'm using a Debian Etch system with two hard drives, /dev/sda and /dev/sdb which are identical in size. /dev/sdb is currently unused, and /dev/sda has the following partitions: * /dev/sda1: /boot partition, ext3; * /dev/sda2: swap; * /dev/sda3: / partition, ext3 In the end I want to have the following situation: * /dev/md0 (made up of /dev/sda1 and /dev/sdb1): /boot partition, ext3; * /dev/md1 (made up of /dev/sda2 and /dev/sdb2): swap; * /dev/md2 (made up of /dev/sda3 and /dev/sdb3): / partition, ext3 This is the current situation: df -h host:~# df -h Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/sdc1 4.6G 453M 4.0G 11% / tmpfs 4.0G 0 4.0G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 10M 60K 10M 1% /dev tmpfs 4.0G 0 4.0G 0% /dev/shm fdisk -l host:~# fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System Disk /dev/sdb: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 1 608 4883728+ 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 609 60801 483500272+ 5 Extended /dev/sdb5 609 669 489951 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sdb6 670 60801 483010258+ 8e Linux LVM Disk /dev/sdc: 1000.2 GB, 1000204886016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 121601 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System Disk /dev/sdd: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System Disk /dev/sde: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System Disk /dev/sdf: 500.1 GB, 500107862016 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 60801 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System 2 Installing mdadm The most important tool for setting up RAID is mdadm. Let's install it like this: apt-get install initramfs-tools mdadm You will be asked the following question: MD arrays needed for the root filesystem: <-- all Afterwards, we load a few kernel modules (to avoid a reboot): modprobe md modprobe linear modprobe multipath modprobe raid0 modprobe raid1 modprobe raid5 modprobe raid6 modprobe raid10 Now run cat /proc/mdstat The output should look as follows: server1:~# cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] unused devices: <none> server1:~# in case there are still active arrays mdadm --fail /dev/md3 /dev/sdb5 mdadm --stop /dev/md3 3 Preparing /dev/sdb To create a RAID1 array on our already running system, we must prepare the /dev/sdb hard drive for RAID1, then copy the contents of our /dev/sda hard drive to it, and finally add /dev/sda to the RAID1 array. First, we copy the partition table from /dev/sda to /dev/sdb so that both disks have exactly the same layout: sfdisk -d /dev/sdb | sfdisk /dev/sdd sfdisk -d /dev/sdb | sfdisk /dev/sde sfdisk -d /dev/sdb | sfdisk /dev/sdf The output should be as follows: server1:~# sfdisk -d /dev/sda | sfdisk /dev/sdb Checking that no-one is using this disk right now ... OK Disk /dev/sdb: 652 cylinders, 255 heads, 63 sectors/track sfdisk: ERROR: sector 0 does not have an msdos signature /dev/sdb: unrecognized partition table type Old situation: No partitions found New situation: Units = sectors of 512 bytes, counting from 0 Device Boot Start End #sectors Id System /dev/sdb1 * 63 289169 289107 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 289170 1285199 996030 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sdb3 1285200 10474379 9189180 83 Linux /dev/sdb4 0 - 0 0 Empty Successfully wrote the new partition table Re-reading the partition table ... If you created or changed a DOS partition, /dev/foo7, say, then use dd(1) to zero the first 512 bytes: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/foo7 bs=512 count=1 (See fdisk(8).) server1:~# The command fdisk -l should now show that both HDDs have the same layout: server1:~# fdisk -l Disk /dev/sda: 5368 MB, 5368709120 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 652 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sda1 * 1 18 144553+ 83 Linux /dev/sda2 19 80 498015 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sda3 81 652 4594590 83 Linux Disk /dev/sdb: 5368 MB, 5368709120 bytes 255 heads, 63 sectors/track, 652 cylinders Units = cylinders of 16065 * 512 = 8225280 bytes Device Boot Start End Blocks Id System /dev/sdb1 * 1 18 144553+ 83 Linux /dev/sdb2 19 80 498015 82 Linux swap / Solaris /dev/sdb3 81 652 4594590 83 Linux server1:~# Next we must change the partition type of our three partitions on /dev/sdb to Linux raid autodetect: fdisk /dev/sdd server1:~# fdisk /dev/sdd Command (m for help): <-- m Command action a toggle a bootable flag b edit bsd disklabel c toggle the dos compatibility flag d delete a partition l list known partition types m print this menu n add a new partition o create a new empty DOS partition table p print the partition table q quit without saving changes s create a new empty Sun disklabel t change a partition's system id u change display/entry units v verify the partition table w write table to disk and exit x extra functionality (experts only) Command (m for help): <-- t Partition number (1-4): <-- 1 Hex code (type L to list codes): <-- L 0 Empty 1e Hidden W95 FAT1 80 Old Minix be Solaris boot 1 FAT12 24 NEC DOS 81 Minix / old Lin bf Solaris 2 XENIX root 39 Plan 9 82 Linux swap / So c1 DRDOS/sec (FAT- 3 XENIX usr 3c PartitionMagic 83 Linux c4 DRDOS/sec (FAT- 4 FAT16 <32M 40 Venix 80286 84 OS/2 hidden C: c6 DRDOS/sec (FAT- 5 Extended 41 PPC PReP Boot 85 Linux extended c7 Syrinx 6 FAT16 42 SFS 86 NTFS volume set da Non-FS data 7 HPFS/NTFS 4d QNX4.x 87 NTFS volume set db CP/M / CTOS / . 8 AIX 4e QNX4.x 2nd part 88 Linux plaintext de Dell Utility 9 AIX bootable 4f QNX4.x 3rd part 8e Linux LVM df BootIt a OS/2 Boot Manag 50 OnTrack DM 93 Amoeba e1 DOS access b W95 FAT32 51 OnTrack DM6 Aux 94 Amoeba BBT e3 DOS R/O c W95 FAT32 (LBA) 52 CP/M 9f BSD/OS e4 SpeedStor e W95 FAT16 (LBA) 53 OnTrack DM6 Aux a0 IBM Thinkpad hi eb BeOS fs f W95 Ext'd (LBA) 54 OnTrackDM6 a5 FreeBSD ee EFI GPT 10 OPUS 55 EZ-Drive a6 OpenBSD ef EFI (FAT-12/16/ 11 Hidden FAT12 56 Golden Bow a7 NeXTSTEP f0 Linux/PA-RISC b 12 Compaq diagnost 5c Priam Edisk a8 Darwin UFS f1 SpeedStor 14 Hidden FAT16 <3 61 SpeedStor a9 NetBSD f4 SpeedStor 16 Hidden FAT16 63 GNU HURD or Sys ab Darwin boot f2 DOS secondary 17 Hidden HPFS/NTF 64 Novell Netware b7 BSDI fs fd Linux raid auto 18 AST SmartSleep 65 Novell Netware b8 BSDI swap fe LANstep 1b Hidden W95 FAT3 70 DiskSecure Mult bb Boot Wizard hid ff BBT 1c Hidden W95 FAT3 75 PC/IX Hex code (type L to list codes): <-- fd Changed system type of partition 1 to fd (Linux raid autodetect) Command (m for help): <-- t Partition number (1-4): <-- 1 Hex code (type L to list codes): <-- fd Changed system type of partition 2 to fd (Linux raid autodetect) Command (m for help): <-- t Partition number (1-4): <-- 5 Hex code (type L to list codes): <-- fd Changed system type of partition 3 to fd (Linux raid autodetect) Command (m for help): <-- w The partition table has been altered! Calling ioctl() to re-read partition table. Syncing disks. server1:~# To make sure that there are no remains from previous RAID installations on /dev/sdb, we run the following commands: mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdb1 mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdb2 mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdb3 If there are no remains from previous RAID installations, each of the above commands will throw an error like this one (which is nothing to worry about): server1:~# mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sdb1 mdadm: Unrecognised md component device - /dev/sdb1 server1:~# Otherwise the commands will not display anything at all. 4 Creating Our RAID Arrays Now let's create our RAID arrays /dev/md0, /dev/md1, and /dev/m |