The consensus seems to be that there's nothing wrong with what we're doing,
subject to some restrictions:
* Since the disklabel is in LBN 0, you need a partition that starts there so
you can access the disk label. We have this with our a partition.
* You can't use the partition that starts at LBN 0 for a raw device that
you're going to write to, since this would likely destroy the label. We
don't use our a partition, so the disklabel should be safe.
Since we've reproduced the problem that started all this using a disk with a
standard label, this is not a major issue at this time, but we will be
digging into this once the current problem is resolved (look for a post on
that if Compaq doesn't start coming up with something Real Soon Now).
Thanks for all the replies.
> -----Original Message-----
> I'm working with Compaq on a problem with one of my 4.0F
> clusters. It seems
> that my DRD services won't start on one member after altering the SAN
> configuration.
>
> The DRD devices are used by Oracle and have non-standard disk
> labels, such
> that the b, c, d, e, f, g, and h partitions are in use. These
> partitions are
> all defined in the disk label to be non-overlapping:
>
> 8 partitions:
> # size offset fstype [fsize bsize cpg]
> # NOTE:
> values not exact
> a: 131072 0 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl. 0
> - 25*)
> b: 409600 131072 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 25*- 106*)
> c: 358400 540672 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 106*- 176*)
> d: 358400 899072 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 176*- 247*)
> e: 4718592 1257472 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 247*- 1176*)
> f: 11534336 5976064 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 1176*- 3446*)
> g: 11534336 17510400 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 3446*- 5717*)
> h: 6511653 29044736 unused 0 0
> # (Cyl.
> 5717*- 6999*)
>
> The Compaq engineer I'm working with has latched onto this as
> the major
> problem, saying that this sort of thing is not supported and
> will cause
> unpredictable operation and must be fixed. For the purposes of
> troubleshooting, I just said "OK", and added another disk
> with a standard
> label and reproduced the problem with that disk.
>
> In the meantime, does this not being able to modify disk labels sound
> correct to y'all's collective wisdom? Even the installation
> procedure gives
> you the option of altering the disklabel to set the size of
> the root and
> swap partitions. Or did they go too far when they configured
> this particular
> disk?
---
Bluejay Adametz, CFII, A&P bluejay_at_fujigreenwood.com
Fuji Photo Film, Inc. +1 864 223 2888 x1369
Greenwood, SC, USA
---
Life is like a shower: A wrong turn can leave you in hot water.
Received on Wed Sep 26 2001 - 11:41:30 NZST