On Tuesday June 10, dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx wrote: > > I am able to reproduce this here, and I notice that it does not happen > with v0.90 superblocks. In the v0.90 case when the array is stopped > the last disk remains marked as spare. The following hack seems to > achieve the same effect for v1 arrays, but I wonder if it is > correct... Neil? No, not correct. The fact that a v1 array included spares in the array before recovery completes is deliberate. It allows recovery to be restarted from where it got up to if the array is shut down while recovery is happening. If you don't mark the drive as a part of the array (though not in_sync), then there is no opportunity for this optimisation. Thanks, 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
