Chris Eddington wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for the pointer on xfs_repair -n , it actually tells me something > (some listed below) but I'm not sure what it means but there seems to be > a lot of data loss. One complication is I see an error message in ata6, > so I moved the disks around thinking it was a flaky sata port, but I see > the error again on ata4 so it seems to follow the disk. But it happens > exactly at the same time during xfs_repair sequence, so I don't think it > is a flaky disk. Does dmesg have any info/sata errors? xfs_repair will have problems if the disk is bad. You may want to image the disk (possibly onto the 'spare'?) if it is bad. > I'll go to the xfs mailing list on this. Very good idea :) > Is there a way to be sure the disk order is right? The order looks right to me. xfs_repair wouldn't recognise it as well as it does if the order was wrong. > not way out of wack since I'm seeing so much from xfs_repair. Also > since I've been moving the disks around, I want to be sure I have the > right order. Bear in mind that -n stops the repair fixing a problem. Then as the 'repair' proceeds it becomes very confused by problems that should have been fixed. This is evident in the superblock issue (which also probably explains the failed mount). > > Is there a way to try restoring using the other disk? No the event count was very out of date. - 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
