Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2010 21:23:28 +0200
From: Ralf Gross <Ralf-Lists@ralfgross.de>
To: Emmanuel Florac <eflorac@intellique.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: XFS internal error xfs_da_do_buf(2)
Message-ID: <20100922192328.GC23326@pirx.askja.de>
References: <20100922072653.GA23326@pirx.askja.de> <20100922103134.4e652651@galadriel.home>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20100922103134.4e652651@galadriel.home>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

Emmanuel Florac schrieb:
> Le Wed, 22 Sep 2010 09:26:53 +0200 vous écriviez:
> 
> > Infortrend RAID with BBU -> DRBD -> LVM -> XFS
> 
> I'm not sure to understand; DRBD is used to mirror devices, are you
> using 2 Infortrend arrays, or one split into two volumes? 

yes, 2 drbd/heartbeat nodes, 2 Infortrend systems

 
> In any case, battery protected write cache shouldn't create any
> corruption (OTOH it will enhance performance dramatically). AFAIK all
> RAID arrays mirror the drives cache in the array cache until it hits
> platters. There may be some "cheating" hard drives (I heard that WD
> isn't always totally clear about cache policies) but Seagate and Hitachi
> professional grade drives definitely are OK. Hint: don't use desktop
> hard drives in any case because they probably cheat about cache
> synchronisation.

The drives are 15000 RPM SAS drives, so no desktops drives. As far as
I understand the documentation, when the "Delayed Drive Write" RAID
option is enabled, there is the possibility of data loss.
 
> I see that you may have been running rsync at the time of failure; there
> are quite a lot of quite unclear (to me at least) cases of XFS failures
> when running rsync to copy large amount of data. I it a fully 64 bits
> system?

There were many more lines with this error in the logs. Triggered by
smbd, rsync, bacula...

Ralf