Subject: Re: Data corruption issues possibly involving cgd(4)
To: Nino Dehne <email@example.com>
From: Daniel Carosone <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/17/2007 08:32:50
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Tue, Jan 16, 2007 at 08:49:14PM +0100, Nino Dehne wrote:
> > considerable numbers of seeks. It is the seeks that cause the disks to
> > draw current bursts from the psu - so don't discount that.
> Good point. To accommodate to that, I repeatedly cat'ed the test file on =
> cgd partition to /dev/null. At the same time, I hashed the first 64M of r=
> in a loop. I used 64M instead of 256M because the disk thrashing was real=
> bad. I also set the CPU frequency to its maximum to maximize the power the
> system draws.
a cpu-hog process would help here too..
> I attribute the checksum change to changes on the filesystem, since that =
> obviously mounted while doing the test.=20
Probably, yeah; I gave some suggestions for ways to avoid this a
moment ago, too.
> Getting over 70 equal checksums and then 3 equal other checksums in
> a row with flaky hardware seems highly improbable to me.
Or the 64m is fitting in cache most of the time, and the bad read was
cached and thus repeated?
> i.e. mismatch at the 3rd run. I seriously doubt that the 70+ successful r=
> on the rcgd0d device were pure luck.
Please try some of the other variants I suggested. Perhaps try
varying the block size of the dd, too. If these eliminate seeking,
then the next possible culprit is probably the filesystem :-/.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (NetBSD)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----