<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 4:18 PM, Bram Matthys <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:syzop@vulnscan.org" target="_blank">syzop@vulnscan.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----<br>
Hash: SHA256<br>
<br>
Hi,<br>
<br>
Just jumping in, unaware of the history of this thread...<br>
<br>
Stanislav German-Evtushenko wrote, on 27-1-2014 7:08:<br>
<div class="im">><br>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 4:21 PM, Stanislav German-Evtushenko<br>
</div><div class="im">> <<a href="mailto:ginermail@gmail.com">ginermail@gmail.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ginermail@gmail.com">ginermail@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
><br>
> No choice so far :)<br>
> <a href="http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Roadmap#Proxmox_VE_2.3" target="_blank">http://pve.proxmox.com/wiki/Roadmap#Proxmox_VE_2.3</a><br>
><br>
> I don't think this is a kernel bug. Anyway would be nice if sombody<br>
> can investigate and fix or at least find work around. IDE is slow in<br>
> compare to VIRTIO.<br>
><br>
> On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 2:31 PM, Felix Frank <<a href="mailto:ff@mpexnet.de">ff@mpexnet.de</a><br>
</div><div class="im">> <mailto:<a href="mailto:ff@mpexnet.de">ff@mpexnet.de</a>>> wrote:<br>
> > On 04/18/2013 12:20 PM, Stanislav German-Evtushenko wrote:<br>
> >>> Note that your kernel (and hence kvm/virtio) can be considered<br>
> rather old by now.<br>
> >> This is a stable RHEL 6 kernel at the moment.<br>
> ><br>
> > Exactly ;-)<br>
> ><br>
> > Same for Debian 6, which I no longer consider fit for KVM setups<br>
> > (without backports and such).<br>
><br>
><br>
> I have replaced all hard-drives on the first server and upgraded DRBD kernel<br>
> modules to 8.3.15. I do verifying every week. It usually founds new<br>
> out-of-sync sectors, then I check if they are false-positive or not (with<br>
> md5sum) and find that 95% of them are real.<br>
> Could anybody suggest a way to debug? Can it be DRBD + RAID problem? Or DRBD<br>
> + one specific RAID problem?<br>
<br>
</div>Have you figured out on which one of the servers the data is correct? And is<br>
it always the same server? This assumes a primary/secondary setup.<br>
If you know on which server the data is correct then you know - IF it's a<br>
hardware problem - which server is at fault. If it's a software problem,<br>
then you still can't tell.<br>
<br>
Do you run a weekly/monthly RAID verification job? On both servers? Linux sw<br>
raid has this, and presumably hw raid has this option as well.<br>
This would pick up (most) RAID / disk issues.<br>
Silent disk corruption on RAID arrays can occur and disk verification would<br>
be the only way to tell (well, apart from using a filesystem like ZFS).<br>
<br>
Good luck,<br>
<br>
Bram.<br>
<br>
<br>
- --<br>
Bram Matthys<br>
Software developer/IT consultant <a href="mailto:syzop@vulnscan.org">syzop@vulnscan.org</a><br>
Website: <a href="http://www.vulnscan.org" target="_blank">www.vulnscan.org</a><br>
PGP key: <a href="http://www.vulnscan.org/pubkey.asc" target="_blank">www.vulnscan.org/pubkey.asc</a><br>
PGP fp: EBCA 8977 FCA6 0AB0 6EDB 04A7 6E67 6D45 7FE1 99A6<br>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)<br>
<br>
iF4EAREIAAYFAlLmToAACgkQbmdtRX/hmabbewD9HEaFbFw1j91AgDiAbgWcDari<br>
qZ/fYOYBw/qyMMempbMA/iCKM5Y2Oa3XAUApPWc05cTZ+W9FyOGdOmNgIl4FMGE0<br>
=z7Jn<br>
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
drbd-user mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:drbd-user@lists.linbit.com">drbd-user@lists.linbit.com</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user" target="_blank">http://lists.linbit.com/mailman/listinfo/drbd-user</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br>> Have you figured out on which one of the servers the data is correct?<br>> And is it always the same server?<br>It depends on what server is writing. On the one which write it is always correct.<br>
Servers are identical and firmwares are up to date.<br><div><br>> Do you run a weekly/monthly RAID verification job? On both servers?<br></div><div>That is nice point to try. I've been thinking I'd tried everything already.<br>
</div><div><br>> This would pick up (most) RAID / disk issues.<br></div><div>This is very unlikely, however I'll try to run RAID verification job on both and will come back with results.<br><br></div>Stanislav<br></div>
</div>