On Thursday March 20, hubskml@xxxxxxx wrote: > Hi list > > Each time I create a RAID5 array, by default, as a degraded array with a > spare, I cannot stop and restart the array unless the initial resync has > completed. If I do so, the resync is not resumed when the array is > re-assembled. > Is this due to the fact that one disk is a spare, but md actually > doesn't know which of the disks is the spare one ? No. It is due to that fact that the v0.90 metadata has no convenient place to record how far the recovery has progressed. If you use --metadata=1 when creating the array, it will be able to record the status of incomplete recovery and restart is properly. NeilBrown > > Assuming that there is no bug and no workaround about this issue, I > think the following: when one cannot guarantee the array won't be > stopped until the resync completes, one should better create the RAID5 > array with the -f option. Indeed, when I use -f, I can stop the array > and restart it, the resync will be resumed where it had stopped. > The cost of this is that the initial resync runs slower. > > Comments are welcome. > > Thanks, > Hubert > > PS: the reshape patch from Neil on 03/03/08 does not fix the issue. > -- > 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 -- 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
