Subject: Re: bin/26741: "raidctl -S" doesn't always work as expected
To: Matthias Scheler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Greg A. Woods <email@example.com>
Date: 08/26/2004 19:31:03
[ On Wednesday, August 25, 2004 at 08:32:29 (+0200), Matthias Scheler wrote: ]
> Subject: Re: bin/26741: "raidctl -S" doesn't always work as expected
> That would result in something like ...
> Parity status: DIRTY
> Reconstruction is 100% complete.
> Parity Re-write is 100% complete.
> Copyback is 100% complete.
Indeed it does.
> ... which looks wrong, too.
Well it certainly seems a heck of a lot better than saying "100%
complete" about everything when there's an obvious problem with the RAID
> I wonder why RAIDFRAME_CHECK_RECON_STATUS
> return 100% if the reconstruction hasn't even started.
It's the status of the _previous_ operation when one is not ongoing.
That seems logical enough to me. :-)
How's it supposed to know what the operator might do in the future?
Greg A. Woods
<firstname.lastname@example.org> +1 416 489-5852 x122 http://www.planix.com/