On Thursday April 5, dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > On 4/5/07, Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 05, 2007 at 09:54:14AM -0400, Bill Davidsen wrote: > > > > > I confess, I would feel safer with my data if the rebuild started > > > over, I would like to be sure that when it (finally) finishes the > > > data are valid. > > > > With disk #3 about to die, I'd have felt safer if it first finished > > rebuilding the replacement disk for failed disk #1 (that rebuild had > > almost completed at that point), safeguarding the array against a > > third disk failure. > > > I agree, the current arrangement seems to throw away a significant > amount of work. Yes, you will need to resync when re-adding the > second disk, but in the meantime might as well try to get a redundant > mode at all costs. Yes, I think you are right. If you want it to restart from the beginning you can alway abort the current resync by 'echo idle > sync_action'. The question is: is it really as simple to do as it sounds. I seem to remember that aborting the recovery on any error was any easy way to avoid some nasty race, but I have no idea what the race was. One would need the enumerate all the interesting cases and make sure they will all work as expected. I cannot think of an problems immediately but that doesn't mean there aren't any... It is now on my todo list... 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
