Re: is this raid5 OK ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 3/29/07, Neil Brown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thursday March 29, rfu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> hi,
>
> I manually created my first raid5 on 4 400 GB pata harddisks:
>
> [root@server ~]# mdadm --create --verbose /dev/md0 --level=5 --raid-devices=4 --spare-devices=0 /dev/hde1 /dev/hdf1 /dev/hdg1 /dev/hdh1
> mdadm: layout defaults to left-symmetric
> mdadm: chunk size defaults to 64K
> mdadm: size set to 390708736K
> mdadm: array /dev/md0 started.
>
> but, mdstat shows:
>
> [root@server ~]# cat /proc/mdstat
> Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4]
> md0 : active raid5 hdh1[4] hdg1[2] hdf1[1] hde1[0]
>       1172126208 blocks level 5, 64k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/3] [UUU_]
>
> unused devices: <none>
>
> I'm surprised to see that there's one "failed" device [UUU_] ?
> shouldn't it read [UUUU] ?

It should read "UUU_" at first while building the 4th drive
(rebuilding a missing drive is faster that calculating and writing all
the parity blocks).  But it doesn't seem to be doing that.

What kernel version?  Try the latest 2.6.x.y in that series.

I have seen something similar with older versions of mdadm when
specifying all the member drives at once.  Does the following kick
things into action?

mdadm --create /dev/md0 -n 4 -l 5 /dev/hd[efg]1 missing
mdadm --add /dev/md0 /dev/hdh1

--
Dan
-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux