I'm running right now the latest patches as well and I still have this read only problem and its on 3 machines each with a slightly different setup but the same. One of my machines has its swap partition on a raid 5 actually and it also suffers the same problem. Please keep us posted if you find anything out. Thanks, - Jake On 10/11/07, Moby <moby@mobsternet.com> wrote:

Is your swap raid still stuck in read-only mode? Yes, it is weird that resume= causes a lock on the array in 10.3 but not in 10.2. I am pretty sure it is a bug, possibly in the swsup (I think) utility that handles hibernation etc. I am going to see if I can setup a test machine and replicate the problem consistently with all the latest patches (including the kernel update for 10.3).

Regards, --MOby

Jake Conk wrote:

...

What's weird is I was just looking at my last 10.2 machine that I need to upgrade to 10.3 and I was looking at the grub configuration and it also has "resume=/dev/md1" (which is the swap partition). I don't know why it would work in 10.1 and 10.2 (no idea about 10.0) but now we must change this in 10.3 in order to get swap on raid 1 or raid 5 working with mdadm unless we choose raid 0. I wonder if this is a bug or something and we should send it to SuSE somehow if it is.

Regards, - Jake

On 10/9/07, Moby <moby@mobsternet.com> wrote:

...

Richard Creighton wrote:

...

Jake Conk wrote:

...

Moby,

THANKS!!!!!! That fixed my problem! Yes I don't know why people insist swap should be on raid 0 other that performance reasons but if your disk goes belly up then yeah your totally screwed. Anyways I'm glad I didn't have to go raid 0 in order to fix this problem and now it works my 10.3, very sweet thank you very much :)

Regards, - Jake

I can't say I insist that RAID 0 for swap is safer in case of malfunction, only that performance is improved and of course you get twice the space over raid 1 and with Linux's ability to mkswap in other partitions in an emergency, either when you run short or if the array poops, you aren't really as exposed as you might think, IMO. But, either way, I'm glad you got it going and I'll remember the 'resume' trick for the future...Thanks Moby... The way many of us divide up our physical drives to make up multiple raid arrays, if my swap partition were to fail, it is likely that I have also lost a drive, which has compromised my other raid arrays, so I have a lot of work to do, and worrying about loss of swap space is the least of my problems :) FWIW, I have 3 G of RAM and I rarely use any swap on disk, so my exposure is somewhat minimal I would expect. That and the general reliability of disk drives now days and I figure I have at least a few weeks of relatively uneventful computing due to hardware failure ahead....now, 10.3 GM is another story :)

Richard

...

On 10/9/07, Moby <moby@mobsternet.com> wrote:

...

Jake Conk wrote:

> Well the reason why I didn't make it raid 0 because if one of the > disks were to go bad then my whole raid would go down right? Can you > give me the steps on how to make my md1 device a raid 0 without > reformatting my whole system? I don't think I can stop md1 unless I > stop all the md devices above it right? (md2/3/4/5) > > Thanks, > - Jake > > On 10/9/07, Richard Creighton <ricreig@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > >> Jake Conk wrote: >> >> >> >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> I tried to setup a fresh install of 10.3 with 2 disks and I used YaST >>> to mirror all my partitions. I had originally my raid swap partitions >>> on an extended partition but that didn't work and I thought that was >>> the problem so instead now I put the raid partitions on primary >>> partitions, which still doesn't work. >>> >>> Any suggestions would be appreciated because I'm completely stumped, I >>> can't figure out for the life of mine why my swap partition won't >>> work. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> I think I would try making your swap partition RAID 0 >> >> I have MD0 /boot Raid1 >> MD1 swap Raid 0 >> MD2 / (root) Raid 1 >> MD3 /home Raid 5 >> >> and it works well with both 10.2 and 10.3. There is no advantage to >> using raid1 with swap anyhow, you really don't need it to be backed up >> or duplicated and it just slows the system down even if it did work. >> >> >> >> >>

Most welcome Jake and Richard. Richard, my apologies if I sounded a bit harsh - just my frustration showing on having fought the very same issue for too many hours today before finding the fix. As for swap on RAID1 - well, raid'ing any disk has pros and cons. The machine I was fighting the very same issue on today is almost guaranteed to swap once it goes live, and I need to have it able to run until I can get around to fixing it should a disk go bad - hence the decision to put swap (and everything else) on RAID.

-- --Moby

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org For additional commands, e-mail: opensuse+help@opensuse.org

-- --Moby

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. -- Pastor Martin Niemöller