Nagy Zoltan wrote:
hi
I would simply use a v1.1 superblock which will be situated at the
start of
the array. Then you will face another problem - once you grow a leaf
device,
mdadm will not see the new size as it will find the superblock at sect
0 and
will be done there. You will need to issue mdadm -A ... --update
devicesize.
The rest of the operations are identical.
i feeled that there is another solution that i missed - thank you, next
time
i will do it this way -- because the system is already up and running, i
don't wan't
to recreate the array (about the chunksize: i've got back to 64Kb chunks
because
of that bug - i was happy to see it running ;)
As a side note I am also curious why do you go the raid55 path (I am
not very
impressed however :)
okay - i've run thru the whole scenario a few times - and always come
get back
to raid55, what would you do in myplace? :)
The validity of the snipped arguments depends on how many devices you have at
every level:
*) how many nodes there are?
*) how many disks per node? do all nodes have an equal amount of disks?
Without additional info I would say this: The problem with using raid5 on the
top node is that you are stressing your network additionally for every
r-m-w-cycle. Also rebuild of this array, especially if you add more leaves
will be more and more resource intensive.
In contrast if the top array is RAID10 with 2 chunk copies, you will sacrifice
half the space, however your rebuild will utilize only 2 drives (one reader
one writer).
HTH
Peter
--
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
