2009/4/25 Leslie Rhorer <lrhorer@xxxxxxxxxxx>: > I went ahead and selected 256K. There's something a little odd, though. > mdadm is reporting a device size of 2T. These are 1T drives. The overall > array size is correct but the device size is goofy. I hope this doesn't > cause any problems. As I believe I mentioned before (or maybe it was on > another list), I once had problems with ext3 trying to read beyond the > physical end of the array. > > RAID-Server:/Backup/Personal_Folders# mdadm -Dt /dev/md0 > /dev/md0: > Version : 01.02 > Creation Time : Sat Apr 25 01:17:12 2009 > Raid Level : raid6 > Array Size : 7814098944 (7452.11 GiB 8001.64 GB) > Used Dev Size : 1953524736 (1863.03 GiB 2000.41 GB) It's a bug in mdadm, probably leftover from blocks/sectors migration, I believe it was fixed in 2.6.9. The reality is looking okay, array is safe, it's just mdadm miscalculating on the very last stage of output. Greets, 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
