Re: mdadm mail option configuration

On Wednesday May 29, danci@agenda.si wrote:

On Wed, 29 May 2002, Neil Brown wrote:

quoted

quoted

Then, I just have an init script that runs:

	/sbin/mdadm -Fs --delay=600 &

Why 600 (10 minutes)?? I would suggest 60seconds for normal operation
and 1 second for testing.

I've tried this and maybe I'm missing something. I've set a 5 second
interval for checking and I only got one mail - notifiyng me about
a failure.

Yes, that's right.  One failure, one email.  I'm not in the business
of spam.

Now I'm not sure whether mdadm is supposed to send mail on every check? Or
is it sending mail just when a BAD thing happens?

Exactly.

It has occurred to me that it could be useful to send mail at startup
if there appear to be any abnormalities, but I think I would prefer
that sort of functionality to be external.  A sysdamin might want that
mail are reboot, or every night, or every week, or never.  A simple:
  grep -s > /dev/nu $magic_pattern /proc/mdstat && 
       mail -s "Raid problem on `hostname`" root << END
	    Possible RAID problem, please check.
	    `hostname`
	    `cat /proc/mdstat
	    END

is all that is needed.

  D.

PS: The PROGRAM was started more often (I think three times).

That's quite possible. 
   Once for  Fail
   Once for  RebuildStarted
   maybe some RebuildNN
   Once for  SpareActive

NeilBrown

On Thu, 30 May 2002, Neil Brown wrote:

quoted

I've tried this and maybe I'm missing something. I've set a 5 second
interval for checking and I only got one mail - notifiyng me about
a failure.

Yes, that's right.  One failure, one email.  I'm not in the business
of spam.

I see, I thought it would mail on every status change - as in 'rebuild
started', 'spare active', etc.

quoted

Now I'm not sure whether mdadm is supposed to send mail on every check? Or
is it sending mail just when a BAD thing happens?

Exactly.

OK; that's fine.

quoted

PS: The PROGRAM was started more often (I think three times).

That's quite possible.
   Once for  Fail
   Once for  RebuildStarted
   maybe some RebuildNN
   Once for  SpareActive

Yup, that's exactly how it was. :)

Thanks, D.