Neil Brown wrote: > It is arguable that for a read error on a degraded raid5, that may not > be the best thing to do, but I'm not completely convinced. A read > error will mean that a write to the same stripe will have to fail, so > at the very least we would want to switch the array read-only. That would be much nicer for me as a user, because: * I would know which disks are the freshest (the ones marked U). * My data wouldn't be abruptly pulled offline - right now I'm getting *weird* errors from the systems on top of the array. * I wouldn't have to try and guess the correct 'mdadm' command to stop/start the array (including pointing at the right disks). 2 cents ;). Thanks for the explanation. - 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
