Guy wrote:
It should work!
I certainly hope so! :-)
I used your example, and everything worked as expected. mdadm -C /dev/md3 -R -l5 -n4 /dev/ram0 /dev/ram1 /dev/ram2 missing
And I used your example, even literally pasted it, but strangely, I get from mdadm -D /dev/md3:
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 1 0 0 active sync /dev/ram0
1 1 1 1 active sync /dev/ram1
2 1 2 2 active sync /dev/ram2
3 0 0 0 syncThis on two different machines even. -R or not did not make a difference. That last line is not good, is it? Mr. Brown wrote that to me a few weeks back.
Using /dev/hd[a,c,d]3 yields the same results (3 0 0 0 sync). I did do mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/hd[a,c,d]3.
And yeah, I know using two drives on one ide channel is a not advisable. But it is supported, isn't it? Anyway,
mdadm -C /dev/md3 -l5 -n3 /dev/hda3 /dev/hdc3 missing
produces (mdadm -D /dev/md3):
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
0 3 3 0 active sync /dev/hda3
1 22 3 1 active sync /dev/hdc3
2 0 0 0 syncThis is mdadm - v1.8.1 - 05 November 2004, slackware linux 9.1 kernel 2.4.22, run-of-the-mill 40gb harddisks on a 666mhz p-III. That MHz number might be an omen.
Thanks for the swift replies.
cheers
Ferenc - 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
