NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, October 27, 2009 12:45 pm, John P Poet wrote: >> md3 : inactive sdk[0](S) sdf[1](S) sdg[2](S) sdj[4](S) >> 7814056960 blocks super 1.2 > However the --examine shows that 3 of the 4 devices report a role > of 'spare'... which is odd because "--assemble --force" managed to Hmmm, it's not. Yes, it's odd but not unusual for v1 metadata :) Please have a look at the thread starting with: From: John Hughes <john@xxxxxxxxx Subject: Dumb questions about mdadm #1 - replacing broken disks - "slot" reuse? Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2009 14:13:44 +0200 Message-ID: <4AB37978.5030403@xxxxxxxxx> John and me reported something that looks quite similar to me for v1 metadata already (and the OP runs v1.2 metadata). regards Mario -- Ho ho ho! I am Santa Claus of Borg. Nice assimilation all together! -- 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
