Thread (10 messages) 10 messages, 3 authors, 2011-04-13

Re: RAID6 data-check took almost 2 hours, clicking sounds, system unresponsive

From: John Robinson <hidden>
Date: 2011-04-13 11:58:10

On 13/04/2011 12:13, NeilBrown wrote:
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 11:57:24 +0100 John Robinson
[off-list ref]  wrote:
quoted
On 12/04/2011 22:30, Gavin Flower wrote:
[...]
quoted
quoted
md0 : active raid6 sda3[0] sdb3[4] sdd3[3] sdc3[5](F) sde3[1]
        10751808 blocks level 6, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [5/4] [UU_UU]
This one I don't get:
md0 : active raid6 sda3[0] sde3[1] sdd3[3] sdb3[4] sdc3[5](F)
which ought to be UUUU_ again...

Perhaps `mdadm -D /dev/md[0-2]` would make things clearer...
This is actually more horrible than you imagine.
It isn't really, I was asking for the mdadm -D output precisely to get 
the list of role and slot numbers, having noticed there was no slot 2 in 
Gavin's setup...

[...]
As the current number is pretty much useless, I should probably change it to
the slot number, or an arbitrarily assigned larger number for spares.
This would be an incompatible change, but I very much doubt anyone uses the
numbers for what they actually are, so I doubt that would really matter.

It has just never really got high on my list of priorities....

Lesson:  Ignore the number in [] - it doesn't mean anything useful.
It's not useless, it reflects the order in which devices were added to 
the array.

Suggestion: Don't change the number in /proc/mdstat, just sort the 
devices by role (i.e. the same order as the UUUU_) instead of device 
node, and show spares at the end (as per your arbitrarily-assigned 
larger number, which this way you never have to display).

Cheers,

John.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help