Thanks for your quick reply Anthony! Inline comments below: On 27/04/2018 19:11, Wols Lists wrote: > On 27/04/18 22:49, Guilherme G. Piccoli wrote: > [...] > Sounds like you're not using mdadm to remove the disk. So why do you > expect mdadm to stop the array immediately? It doesn't know anything is > wrong until it trips over the missing disk. In fact, mdadm is aware something is wrong - it tries to stop the array, running "mdadm -If <array-component-just-removed>", but it fails because the mount point prevents it to stop the array. And the question lies exactly in this point: should it be (successfully) stopped? I think it should, since we can continue writing on disks causing data corruption. > [...] > Is your array linear or striped? If it's striped, I would expect it to > fall over in a heap very quickly. If it's linear, it depends whether you It's stripped. I was able to keep writing for some time (minutes). > [...] > Note that raid-0 is NOT redundant. Standard advice is "if a drive fails, > expect to lose your data". So the fact that your array limps on should > be the pleasant surprise, not that it blows up in ways you didn't expect. OK, I understand that. But imagine the following scenario: a regular user gets for some reason a component disk removed, and they don't look the logs before (or after) writes - the user can write stuff thinking everything is fine, and that data is corrupted. I'd expect userspace writes to fail as soon as possible in case one of raid-0 components is gone. Thanks, Guilherme
