On Mon, 12 Mar 2001, Greg Oster wrote:
> Ya... "sucky numbers" here...
> If this is a freshly created set (i.e. no real data on it yet) then
> maybe try something like:

I already have a bunch of junk on it, so I can't do that...

> for the disklabel, and fix up the other numbers to match.  (you'll need to
> newfs it again..)  In your other email you said:
>
> > Hmm, I just ran '/sbin/disklabel raid0' and it gave me a message like it
> > was creating a fresh label. That's not supposed to happen, and I'm pretty
> > sure the following isn't mine (although I am using raid0d):
>
> If it had a label before, then maybe something is eating that label!??!!?
> That would be Bad... :(  Is this the first time you've tried to extract
> that file on this system, and/or the first time you've noticed this perf
> problem?  (I'm guessing it's the 'bad sector/track/cylinder' numbers, but
> if something is eating the disklabel, then it could be something else too..)

It's not just this one file -- any tar file (using tar or pax), moving a
directory to the array, creating a directory (mkdir foo took something
like 12 seconds, but rmdir foo took almost no time at all). cvs is also
slow.. but if I download a file with for example ftp, it comes through
at full speed.

I didn't notice this until I restarted the machine earlier today..

Thanks,
Jared