On Saturday May 7, mrsam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > I noticed a slight oddity on one of my servers: when I start "mdadm > --monitor --scan" I get only the "NewArray" message. On the other server I > get a "NewArray" then a "SparesMissing" message, for each RAID partition. > Neither server has spares. Both servers have a pair of SCSI drives in a > RAID-1 configuration for all of the partitions. > > Well, the real oddity is actually that the other server only reports a > NewArray -- because I see in the ChangeLog mdadm is _supposed_ to report > both NewArray and SparesMissing. But until I turned up the second server I > only ever got NewArray from mdadm, so that was something new. > > Investigating this I discovered that I get a SparesMissing message if I > explicitly enumerate all my RAID partitions in mdadm.conf (mdadm 1.5.0). If > I don't list my partitions in mdadm.conf, mdadm still finds them, but then > reports only a NewArray message. Does that sound right? > > You are only meant to get "SparesMissing" if you have a number of spare disks recorded in your mdadm.conf (e.g. spares=2) and mdadm find that the array has fewer than that number. However a quick look at the code suggests that if it find the array mentioned in mdadm.conf and the number of spares isn't given, it will always report "SparesMissing". I need to be more consistent about using "-1" or "UnSet" to record that some value isn't set. I'll try to rustle up a patch in the next day or so. NeilBrown - 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
