Subject: Re: How to turn off raid?
To: None <>
From: Christos Zoulas <>
List: current-users
Date: 11/23/2005 13:58:08
In article <>,
Neil Booth  <> wrote:
>I have a failed experiment with raid 1 left on my wd0 disk.  Raidframe
>is not working reliably; I presume it is a driver issue; my machine
>frequently locks up.  Without RAID the system has historically been
>rock solid.  The instability was apparent in both 2.0.2 and current.
>I have left wd1 in failed state:
># raidctl -s -v raid0
>           /dev/wd0a: optimal
>           /dev/wd1a: failed
>No spares.
>Component label for /dev/wd0a:
>   Row: 0, Column: 0, Num Rows: 1, Num Columns: 2
>   Version: 2, Serial Number: 2005102901, Mod Counter: 299
>   Clean: No, Status: 0
>   sectPerSU: 128, SUsPerPU: 1, SUsPerRU: 1
>   Queue size: 100, blocksize: 512, numBlocks: 156301312
>   RAID Level: 1
>   Autoconfig: Yes
>   Root partition: Yes
>   Last configured as: raid0
>/dev/wd1a status is: failed.  Skipping label.
>Parity status: DIRTY
>Reconstruction is 100% complete.
>Parity Re-write is 100% complete.
>Copyback is 100% complete.
>I hoped this would be enough to restore my system to stability,
>but alas it is not.  Doing an "svn up" in my GCC repository freezes
>the system after a few seconds.  (As I mentioned, before I played
>with raid my system never froze under NetBSD).  So I would like to
>turn off raid altogether, in the sense of having no raid kernel threads
>running at all.
>a) Will "raidctl -A no raid0" do that?  I'm concerned about rendering
>   my system unbootable doing this.  With auto-configure off, will
>   my system boot with my filesystems still on raid0a etc?  At
>   present raid0 is my boot device; raid0a is root.  The manual
>   page is not clear about exactly what the effects of the raid
>   device being auto-configured or not are.
>b) Will updating wd0's disklabel to point to the file systems currently
>   in raid0a-h so they become normal FFS filesystems for wd0-h work?  I
>   suspect the only change I would need would be to add the offset of
>   raid0 in wd0a to the offsets currently given for raid0a-h?  (this is
>   63).  Or is there some additional reserved area in raid0a that RAID
>   uses that would make it unusable as wd0a?
>c) Anything I need to be careful about?
>Help appreciated, thanks.  I give my two disklabels, fstab and dmesg

It seems that your second drive is busted. What happens if you physically
remove it from the machine and run only one one drive? Does it get stuck
too? I am using raidframe in all the machines I own that have data I would
not like to lose and never had a problem.