hi everybody!
i found out, that the superblock of my raid5 array says it's built out
of 7 disks, but i created it with only 6 disk. the mdadm call used to
create the array was:
mdadm --create /dev/md6 -c 64 -l raid5 -p ls -n 6 --spare-disks=0 \
/dev/hde1 /dev/hdg1 /dev/hdi1 /dev/hdk1 /dev/hdm1 /dev/hdo1
i grep'ed through my .bash_history and that was the only line showing
mdadm --create.
i'm using mdadm version 0.7.2, i think that is pretty old. i will
upgrade to a more recent version and recreate the array.
still i would like to know if i encountered a bug or if thats some other
problem. this mdadm version is the one from debian woody (stable).
output of mdadm --detail /dev/md6
/dev/md6:
Version : 00.90.00
Creation Time : Mon Feb 9 00:55:34 2004
Raid Level : raid5
Array Size : 781240320 (745.04 GiB 799.99 GB)
Device Size : 156248064 (149.00 GiB 159.99 GB)
Raid Disks : 6
Total Disks : 7
Preferred Minor : 6
Persistance : Superblock is persistant
Update Time : Tue Feb 17 20:53:02 2004
State : dirty, no-errors
Active Drives : 6
Working Drives : 6
Failed Drives : 1
Spare Drives : 0
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 64K
Number Major Minor RaidDisk State
0 33 1 0 active sync /dev/hde1
1 34 1 1 active sync /dev/hdg1
2 56 1 2 active sync /dev/hdi1
3 57 1 3 active sync /dev/hdk1
4 88 1 4 active sync /dev/hdm1
5 89 1 5 active sync /dev/hdo1
UUID : 7b22b692:7564eab7:02145e27:9bfc02a2
it seems there are no errors but i don't want to encounter a drive
failure and beeing stuck with a 2 drive failure (i know there are ways
to get a 2 drive failure array back up and working)
thanks in advance
christian
Hi Christian!
Christian Kivalo schrieb:
hi everybody!
i found out, that the superblock of my raid5 array says it's built out
of 7 disks, but i created it with only 6 disk. the mdadm call used to
create the array was:
i'm using mdadm version 0.7.2, i think that is pretty old. i will
upgrade to a more recent version and recreate the array.
still i would like to know if i encountered a bug or if thats some other
problem. this mdadm version is the one from debian woody (stable).
thanks in advance
christian
Yes, that is a bug in the (very old) 0.7.2 of Debian. Additionally,
these old versions cannot handle spare devices (after each assemble, you
hae to add them manually). Use at least mdadm 1.4.0, better the newest
(I believe 1.5.0). You do not need to recreate the array, simply stop it
and (re-)assemble it after you have the new mdadm in place - and the bug
and the wrong output is gone.
Had the same problem (that with the spare device) with SuSE 8.2 and
Debian Woody...
Bye, Norman.
--
Norman Schmidt Institut fuer Physikal. u. Theoret. Chemie
Dipl.-Chem. Friedrich-Alexander-Universitaet
schmidt@naa.net Erlangen-Nuernberg
IT-Systembetreuer Physikalische Chemie
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 10:19:01 +0100, Norman Schmidt
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
i'm using mdadm version 0.7.2, i think that is pretty old. i will
upgrade to a more recent version and recreate the array.
still i would like to know if i encountered a bug or if thats some
other problem. this mdadm version is the one from debian woody
(stable).
thanks in advance
christian
Yes, that is a bug in the (very old) 0.7.2 of Debian. Additionally,
these old versions cannot handle spare devices (after each assemble,
you hae to add them manually). Use at least mdadm 1.4.0, better the
newest (I believe 1.5.0). You do not need to recreate the array,
simply stop it and (re-)assemble it after you have the new mdadm in
place - and the bug and the wrong output is gone.
Had the same problem (that with the spare device) with SuSE 8.2 and
Debian Woody...
hi!
thanks for that information, i will upgrade to the newest mdadm and try
again.
thanks
christian
Bye, Norman.
--
Norman Schmidt Institut fuer Physikal. u. Theoret. Chemie
Dipl.-Chem. Friedrich-Alexander-Universitaet
schmidt@naa.net Erlangen-Nuernberg
IT-Systembetreuer Physikalische Chemie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid"
in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Sat, 21 Feb 2004 10:19:01 +0100, Norman Schmidt
[off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Christian!
Christian Kivalo schrieb:
quoted
hi everybody!
i found out, that the superblock of my raid5 array says it's built
out of 7 disks, but i created it with only 6 disk. the mdadm call
used to create the array was:
quoted
i'm using mdadm version 0.7.2, i think that is pretty old. i will
upgrade to a more recent version and recreate the array.
still i would like to know if i encountered a bug or if thats some
other problem. this mdadm version is the one from debian woody
(stable).
thanks in advance
christian
Yes, that is a bug in the (very old) 0.7.2 of Debian. Additionally,
these old versions cannot handle spare devices (after each assemble,
you hae to add them manually). Use at least mdadm 1.4.0, better the
newest (I believe 1.5.0). You do not need to recreate the array,
simply stop it and (re-)assemble it after you have the new mdadm in
place - and the bug and the wrong output is gone.
Had the same problem (that with the spare device) with SuSE 8.2 and
Debian Woody...
hi norman!
downloaded and compiled mdadm 1.5.0, reassembled the array with
mdadm -A /dev/md6 --update=summaries
and everything looks like expected now.
thanks
christian
Bye, Norman.
--
Norman Schmidt Institut fuer Physikal. u. Theoret. Chemie
Dipl.-Chem. Friedrich-Alexander-Universitaet
schmidt@naa.net Erlangen-Nuernberg
IT-Systembetreuer Physikalische Chemie
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid"
in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html