On 6/1/06, NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
When an array has a bitmap, a device can be removed and re-added and only blocks changes since the removal (as recorded in the bitmap) will be resynced.
Neil, Does the same apply when a bitmap-enabled raid1's member goes faulty? Meaning even if a member is faulty, when the user removes and re-adds the faulty device the raid1 rebuild _should_ leverage the bitmap during a resync right? I've seen messages like: [12068875.690255] raid1: raid set md0 active with 2 out of 2 mirrors [12068875.690284] md0: bitmap file is out of date (0 < 1) -- forcing full recovery [12068875.690289] md0: bitmap file is out of date, doing full recovery [12068875.710214] md0: bitmap initialized from disk: read 5/5 pages, set 131056 bits, status: 0 [12068875.710222] created bitmap (64 pages) for device md0 Could you share the other situations where a bitmap-enabled raid1 _must_ perform a full recovery? - Correct me if I'm wrong, but one that comes to mind is when a server reboots (after cleanly stopping a raid1 array that had a faulty member) and then either: 1) assembles the array with the previously faulty member now available 2) assembles the array with the same faulty member missing. The user later re-adds the faulty member AFAIK both scenarios would bring about a full resync. regards, Mike - 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
