Re: Raid array empty after restart

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 2020-05-25 at 11:03 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> On 5/25/20 2:25 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > On Sun, 2020-05-24 at 16:22 -0700, Samuel Sieb wrote:
> > > On 5/24/20 3:39 PM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 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?
> > > 
> > > That message is a little misleading.  What happened was you created an
> > > 
> > > array out of disks with existing data on them.  Only the superblock gets
> > > 
> > > rewritten, the rest of the drive just gets resynced, not erased.  So
> > > 
> > > your existing partition table is still there.
> > 
> > More than a little misleading.  I'd call the message downright wrong.
> > I'll consider reporting it to BZ.
> 
> It depends on which drive has the partition table and which drive gets 
> cloned to.  For example, you have one blank drive and one with a 
> partition table.  If the blank one get cloned to the other, then the 
> partition table gets wiped out.  If it goes the other way, then your 
> raid has a partition table.  But even in that case, depending on where 
> the raid metadata goes and other factors, it could mess up the table or 
> have it point to the wrong place.  It's best to just assume that the 
> partition table will be invalid even if it appears to still be there. 
> Unless you're really sure about what you're doing, you should always 
> reinitialize a newly created raid array, not trusting the existing data.

That decision was taken by mdadm without input from me, i.e. it's the
default. I see there is an "--assume-clean" option which would possibly
have skipped that step, though the man page doesn't recommend it unless
you know what you're doing, which I clearly don't. All the same, saying
"the partition table *will* be lost or meaningless after creating
array" is certainly wrong.

poc
_______________________________________________
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



[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [EPEL Devel]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux