Thank you for the insight, Robin.
I already have used dd_rescue to find which sectors are bad, so I
guess I could either wait for Matthias to finish his modifications to
mdadm, or I can reconstruct the bad sectors manually (read same sector
from other disks, xor all, write to damaged disk's clone).
Weird thing though, is that when I re-read some of the bad sectors, I
didn't get I/O errors ... it's confusing!
Also, I'd rather avoid a fsck when I have bad sectors to not lose
files. I'll run fsck once I've fixed the bad sectors and resynced the
array.
On Fri, Sep 18, 2009 at 11:28 AM, Robin Hill <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> All the 'check' action does is validate that the checksum matches the
> data. By doing this, it will also be doing a full read check on the
> array (though I'm not certain what action is taken on read failures).
> The 'repair' action will also rewrite any checksums which don't match
> the data.
>
> All of this requires a non-degraded array, so I suspect the 'check' and
> 'repair' actions will get ignored altogether on a degraded array (and
> certainly won't actually work). As the array is degraded, you _can't_
> have any RAID inconsistencies. You may have some filesystem
> inconsistencies (a fsck is definitely recommended) and/or data
> inconsistencies (unless you have checksums or backups to compare against
> then you're stuck on finding these though).
>
> Cheers,
> Robin
> --
> ___
> ( ' } | Robin Hill <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
> / / ) | Little Jim says .... |
> // !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |
>
--
Majed B.
--
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
