[DRBD-user] Any recommendations or cautions on using RAID under DRBD?

drbd at bobich.net drbd at bobich.net
Tue Mar 4 15:55:21 CET 2008

Note: "permalinks" may not be as permanent as we would like,
direct links of old sources may well be a few messages off.

On Tue, 4 Mar 2008, Florian Haas wrote:

> On Tuesday 04 March 2008 15:39:34 drbd at bobich.net wrote:
>>>> DRBD doesn't know and doesn't care if your RAID stripe is degraded or
>>>> optimal. That's a job for something else. The underlying partition for
>>>> DRBD is either there or isn't. There is nothing inbetween. If you want
>>>> to fail over when the local RAID stripe is degraded, then you'll have to
>>>> put in some external monitoring, possibly integrated with heartbeat. So
>>>> yes, probably a Linux-HA question.
>>> Um, not quite.
>>> http://www.drbd.org/users-guide/s-handling-disk-errors.html
>> This is about handling disk errors. I was talking about whether the
>> underlying RAID stripe is degraded or optimal.
> And would you mind enlightening me how a RAID-0 set (whose use you suggested
> earlier) ever becomes "degraded" -- rather than faulty and issuing an I/O
> error -- when losing a disk?
> Last time I checked, RAID-0 wasn't redundant.

Hence why I said that it'd either be there or it wouldn't with nothing 
inbetween. There's cross-talk here between using redundant and 
non-redundant underlying RAID, as both were discussed. The original 
question was whether DRBD or something else handles the fail-over under 
conditions of a degraded redundant stripe.


More information about the drbd-user mailing list