I recently had some interest shown in this so I thought it might be useful to write up some thoughts more coherently and completely. Writes to a RAID5 can be quite slow. We must first check if any of the data to be read is in the cache.
The second-stage boot loader for FreeBSD is capable of loading a kernel from such an array. If the disk fails, you need to replace the failed disk and start RAID rebuild. The rebuild time is also limited if the entire array is still in operation at reduced capacity.
Recently mdadm fixed it by introducing a dedicated journaling device to avoid performance penalty, typically, SSDs and NVMs are preferred for that purpose. What to use the cache for. Adaptec calls this "hybrid RAID". So each section should start with a metadata block and it describes among other things where the next metadata block is.
An advantage of this model over the pure software RAID is that—if using a redundancy mode—the boot drive is protected from failure due to the firmware during the boot process even before the operating systems drivers take over.
However, hardware RAID controllers are expensive and proprietary.
The act of writing data to the RAID will cause the parity in that particular data slice to be resynchronised. Around SeptemberWestern Digital disabled this feature in their desktop drives e.
The time to rebuild the array after a single drive failure, as well as the chance of a second failure during a rebuild, have increased over time. In order to completely avoid the write hole, you need to provide write atomicity.
One unfortunate complication is READs. The former would be most efficient on battery backed RAM devices. Data is written identically to two drives, thereby producing a "mirrored set" of drives.
It is reasonable to ask how much simpler it would be if we decided not to accelerate writes at all. Raid would be a lot more stable and would perform much faster, but has obvious expense concerns.
It probably makes sense to design for the latter but allow the former to be selected by a configuration knob. If the filesystem manages space such that a strip of data one block across all devices in the RAID5 is part of the unit of allocation, so that a strip is always either unused, fully stable, or in the process of being written, and if the filesystem known which, then the write hole becomes a non-problem.
This means that we either write blocks out of order, or we hold all pending blocks until the metadata block is ready. In the same time synchronization detects bad sectors in rarely used areas of an array, because during synchronization all the array sectors are read from and written to.
The problem occurs when the array is started from an unclean shutdown without all devices being available, or if a read error is found before parity is restored after the unclean shutdown.
The "atomic" operation is either fully completed or is not done at all. Similar technologies are used by Seagate, Samsung, and Hitachi.
When this occurs it is undetectable and may go unnoticed resulting in problems at a later time. Modern hardware controllers usually allow to synchronize an array by schedule. In these cases, transactions are typically used. I would expect to hear about it at least occasionally if it happened much at all.
Then we clear the log and restart the array. If you cant do timely backups, I suggest you get a raid controller with a 'backup' battery at minimum.
R5 has several serious flaws that affect whole-array integrity see about the RAID-5 write holethe most important of which is due to the design concept itself - an array with a single missing member is degraded, and it only takes a single error in that degraded array to damage data or bork the entire array.
Once in a blue moon. The oldest video is recorded over. Upon failure of a single drive, subsequent reads can be calculated from the distributed parity such that no data is lost. If this is the case then the content of the parity block will not accurately reflect the contents of all the data blocks.
If a file system does not support journaling, the errors will still be corrected during the next consistency check CHKDSK or fsck. For non-RAID usage, an enterprise class drive with a short error recovery timeout that cannot be changed is therefore less suitable than a desktop drive.
The mirrored disks, called a "shadow set", can be in different locations to assist in disaster recovery. Although this situation is fairly rare, it can lead to serious problems, especially if a data recovery is required. When RAID starts up after an unclean shutdown it will recalculate all of the parity blocks on stripes that might have been in the process of being updated and will write out new values if they are wrong.
The RAID5 Write Hole 14 Jan The latest edition of the venerable UNIX and Linux System Administration Handbook (Nemeth et al) has a good section discussing the “RAID5 Write Hole”.
Finally, RAID 5 is vulnerable to corruption in certain circumstances. Its incremental updating of parity data is more efficient than reading the entire stripe and recalculating the stripe’s parity based. Closing the RAID5 write hole 14 JuneUTC. When RAID starts up after an unclean shutdown it will recalculate all of the parity blocks on stripes that might have been in the process of being updated and will write out new values if they are wrong.
This is known as "resync" in md parlance. If a power failure occurs during the write process to a RAID, the “write hole” phenomenon can be the result.
This can happen in any RAID array including RAID 1, RAID 5 and RAID 6 whereby it’s impossible to determine which data blocks or parity information was not written to disk. The write hole can affect every RAID level but RAID-0; both striped (RAID-4/5/6) and mirrored (RAID-1) configurations may be vulnerable, simply due to the fact that atomic writes are impossible in 2 or more disks.
Yes, unfortunately btrfs RAID5/6 still suffers from the write hole (10/). The one missing piece, from a reliability point of view, is that it is still vulnerable to the parity RAID "write hole", where a partial write as a result of a.
"Write hole" is widely recognized to affect a RAID5, and most of the discussions of the "write hole" effect refer to RAID5.
It is important .Raid 5 write hole