On 2020-05-25 06:39, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: > On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 05:34 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: >> On 2020-05-25 05:20, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote: >>> On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 03:16 +0800, Ed Greshko wrote: >>>>>> NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT >>>>>> sda 8:0 0 50G 0 disk >>>>>> └─md0 9:0 0 50G 0 raid1 >>>>>> sdb 8:16 0 50G 0 disk >>>>>> └─md0 9:0 0 50G 0 raid1 >>>>>> sr0 11:0 1 1024M 0 rom >>>>>> vda 252:0 0 30G 0 disk >>>>>> ├─vda1 252:1 0 1G 0 part /boot >>>>>> └─vda2 252:2 0 29G 0 part >>>>>> ├─fedora_f31k-root 253:0 0 27G 0 lvm / >>>>>> └─fedora_f31k-swap 253:1 0 2.1G 0 lvm [SWAP] >>>>>> and it seems a bit more "sane" than your configuration. >>>>> Yours is using LVM, which I wanted to avoid. That may be the root of >>>>> the issue (though I've no idea why). >>>> ????? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> The RAID Array isn't using LVM. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> This is just an added pair of disks, with RAID. >>> Oops, I was looking at the vda[12] rather than sd[ab] >> OK. All things being equal, if I were in your shoes I'd go back and redo the RAID creation. >> >> When the "mdadm --create" is performed and mirroring of the drives begins the array can still >> be used. You can proceed with mkfs on it simultaneous. > OK, I did this: > > # mdadm --create /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sd[de] > mdadm: /dev/sdd appears to be part of a raid array: > level=raid1 devices=2 ctime=Wed May 20 16:34:58 2020 > mdadm: partition table exists on /dev/sdd but will be lost or > meaningless after creating array > mdadm: Note: this array has metadata at the start and > may not be suitable as a boot device. If you plan to > store '/boot' on this device please ensure that > your boot-loader understands md/v1.x metadata, or use > --metadata=0.90 > mdadm: /dev/sde appears to be part of a raid array: > level=raid1 devices=2 ctime=Wed May 20 16:34:58 2020 > mdadm: partition table exists on /dev/sde but will be lost or > meaningless after creating array > Continue creating array? y > mdadm: Fail create md0 when using /sys/module/md_mod/parameters/new_array > mdadm: Defaulting to version 1.2 metadata > mdadm: array /dev/md0 started. > > And now I find: > # lsblk > NAME MAJ:MIN RM SIZE RO TYPE MOUNTPOINT > [...] > sdd 8:48 0 931.5G 0 disk > └─md0 9:0 0 931.4G 0 raid1 > └─md0p1 259:0 0 931.4G 0 part /run/media/poc/6cb66da2-147a-4f3c-a513-36f6164ab581 > sde 8:64 0 931.5G 0 disk > └─md0 9:0 0 931.4G 0 raid1 > └─md0p1 259:0 0 931.4G 0 part /run/media/poc/6cb66da2-147a-4f3c-a513-36f6164ab581 > > So although the above message says the existing partition table will be > lost, for some reason I'm still getting a partition, while you > apparently didn't. I copied the --create command directly from the man > page. Is this not the "standard" way you mentioned in an earlier reply? > > Finally, the /run/media/... etc. mounts now show my existing data. All > the same, the disk lights are busy and I expect them to be going all > night. > Well, I had 2 totally clean disks to start with. I see I should not have used the word "redo". What I was meaning to convey is that I'd destroy the existing ARRAY and start all over again. I did... mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=1 --raid-devices=2 /dev/sda /dev/sdb followed by mkfs.ext4 -F /dev/md0 -- The key to getting good answers is to ask good questions. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
