Re: Beating a dead horse

[Robert Elz <kre%munnari.OZ.AU@localhost>]

    Date:        Wed, 25 Nov 2015 10:52:30 -0600
    From:        Greg Oster <oster%netbsd.org@localhost>
    Message-ID:  <20151125105230.209c5fed%mickey.usask.ca@localhost>

  | Just to recap: You have a RAID set that is not 4K aligned with the
  | underlying disks. 

Actually, I think it is - though we haven't seen all the data yet to
prove it.  The unaligned assumption was based upon misreading fdisk
output.  That was incorrect - but doesn't actually mean that it is
properly aligned, it probably is OK, but we have not yet seen the
BSD disklabel for the data disks to be sure (we know the BSD fdisk
partition is OK, but that's then divided into pieces, and we have
not - not recently anyway - been told that breakup).   We also haven't
seen the filesystem layout within the raid.

Everything else makes sense, and William, that does come from a raid expert,
you can believe what Greg says, take what I say as more of a semi-literate
guess.

One question though, Greg you suggest 32 block stripe, and 64K filesys
block size.   Would 16 block stripe and 32K blocksize work as well?

So, William, two more command outputs needed ...

	disklabel wd0

(or any of the drives that are all identical, if they are not all
identical, then disklabel for each different layout).   We need to
see where wd0f (and wd1f etc) start...

And, for the raid set itself,

	gpt show raid2

kre