Hmm. I posted the following (from my subbed addr) but it never appeared - in my inbox or on MARC. Perhaps I hit a keyword; reposting with some tweaks. On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 16:18:07 -0700, "Matthew (RAID)" <RAID@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > One more thing - run hdparm to check that the DMA settings are > consistent - the same on all drives. > Switch to the most conservative settings (the slowest ones). > If they're not the same on all drives, I've heard (on /.) that it can > cause some of the problems you're seeing. > > My original reply below - it just went to Bernhard; I didn't check the > addressing. > > Let us know how things go. > > PS Any ideas on my post? > > On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 22:16:56 +0200, "Bernhard Dobbels" > <Bernhard@xxxxxxxxxxx> said: > > > >> <snip> > > > >> viking:/home/bernhard# cat /etc/raidtab > >> raiddev /dev/md0 > >> raid-level 5 > >> nr-raid-disks 3 > >> nr-spare-disks 0 > >> persistent-superblock 1 > >> parity-algorithm left-symmetric > >> > >> device /dev/hdc1 > >> raid-disk 0 > >> device /dev/hde1 > >> failed-disk 1 > >> device /dev/hdg1 > >> raid-disk 2 > > > Hmm. So the array is c+e+g, which think they are spare, failed, and > good, respectively. > The array won't be accessible unless at least two are good. > > I wonder if running mkraid with --really-force when e was marked failed > was a good idea; hopefully it didn't make things worse. > > > >> > >> > >> viking:/home/bernhard# mkraid --really-force /dev/md0 > >> DESTROYING the contents of /dev/md0 in 5 seconds, Ctrl-C if unsure! > >> handling MD device /dev/md0 > >> analyzing super-block > >> disk 0: /dev/hdc1, 195358401kB, raid superblock at 195358336kB > >> disk 1: /dev/hde1, failed > >> disk 2: /dev/hdg1, 195358401kB, raid superblock at 195358336kB > >> /dev/md0: Invalid argument > >> > >> viking:/home/bernhard# raidstart /dev/md0 > >> /dev/md0: Invalid argument > >> > >> > >> viking:/home/bernhard# cat /proc/mdstat > >> Personalities : [raid1] [raid5] > >> md0 : inactive hdg1[2] hdc1[0] > >> 390716672 blocks > >> unused devices: <none> > >> viking:/home/bernhard# pvscan -v > >> Wiping cache of LVM-capable devices > >> Wiping internal cache > >> Walking through all physical volumes > >> Incorrect metadata area header checksum > >> Found duplicate PV uywoDlobnH0pbnr09dYuUWqB3A5kkh8M: using /dev/hdg1 > >> not /dev/hdc1 > >> Incorrect metadata area header checksum > >> Incorrect metadata area header checksum > >> Incorrect metadata area header checksum > >> Found duplicate PV uywoDlobnH0pbnr09dYuUWqB3A5kkh8M: using /dev/hdg1 > >> not /dev/hdc1 > >> PV /dev/hdc1 VG data_vg lvm2 [372,61 GB / 1,61 GB free] > >> PV /dev/hda1 lvm2 [4,01 GB] > >> Total: 2 [376,63 GB] / in use: 1 [372,61 GB] / in no VG: 1 [4,01 GB] > > > Yow. > > I'm wondering if editing raidtab to make e (/dev/hde1) not failed and > trying mkraid again is a good idea. > > Any idea why c would think it was a spare? That's pretty strange. > Anyway, I'm no expert - I just posted a call for help: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-raid&m=108932298006669&w=2 that went unanswered. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
