Thanks for the good advice. ddrescue on sdb returned an error of 4kB.
I do still have my old sde. But one thing I did, which was stupid,
was trying to rebuild the raid-5 when it was mounted. So I don't know
the old sde is still consistent with the rest 3 disks, since some
files would have been modified between the times when I took the old
sde offline and when the rebuild failed.
So at this point, I guess I'll get 4 new drives and set up a brand new
raid-6 and try to restore my data from my backup in an external drive
and hope for the best. I'll keep the 4 drives from my old raid-5 just
in case if I need to recover something from them.
I guess I learned my lesson. I should have ddrescued all the disks I
want to replace, instead of using md's rebuild mechanism.
DS
On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 10:57 PM, Stefan Hübner
<stefan.huebner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I do RAID-recoveries at least once a month and get paid for it. Rule of
> thumb: if your have one drive dropped and another one with pending
> sectors, your rebuild will fail - no need for calculations there.
>
> ddrescue on a clean disk is about half as fast as dd with a blocksize
> beyond 1M. ddrescue on a disk with pending sectors is just no pita as
> dd or sg_dd would be, because it adds the neccesary intelligence.
>
> Do you have the original sde still around? If yes, ddrescue both: sdb
> and sde. My experience says: there will only be a few KB lost. Then
> re-create your raid (it will only write the superblock new) with
> "--assume-clean". After that worked, you might make another (big)
> backup first, then run fsck and see what happens. If the lost bytes
> have screwed the filesystem, you might want to re-create the raid with
> another (personally I prefer xfs) fs and replay your backup into it.
>
> A few commands to make the intentions cleaner:
> ddrescue -dv -r5 /dev/oldsdb1 /dev/newsdb1 /root/sdblog
> ddrescue -dv -r5 /dev/oldsde1 /dev/newsde1 /root/sdelog
> ... find out which drive is which raid-device -> mdadm -E /dev/sdX1
> mdadm --create /dev/md0 --raid-devices=4 --level=5
> --chunk=${your_chunk_size_in_kb} --assume-clean
> ${ordered_list_of_raid_devices}
>
> Hope this helps,
> Stefan Hübner
>
>
> Am 09.02.2010 05:20, schrieb Dawning Sky:
>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Dawning Sky <the.dawning.sky@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Now I have two faulty drives and things don't look good. However, I
>>> was able to add the sdb back to the array and md seemed not mind and
>>> still reported "active sync". At this point I shut down computer and
>>> decided to clone sdb with clonezilla so that I can have a good sdb to
>>> finish rebuilding sde. Not sure if it will complete without I/O
>>> errors. It appears clonezilla is using dd and the speed is extremely
>>> slow (~5MB/sec) and it says it's gonna take 1 day to clone the 500GB.
>>>
>>>
>> As expected, dd encountered the same UNC error. Now I'm trying to
>> ddrescue the drive to see what happens. My question is whether this
>> is worth doing. Assuming ddrescue cannot read the bad sector either
>> and writes 0's to the new drive, will I be able to rebuild the raid-5,
>> from 2 good disks and this disk with a bad sector? I can assume there
>> will be a bad file but will the array still function?
>>
>> Or I'm better off just build a new array from scratch.
>>
>> Any suggestions are appreciated.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> DS
>> --
>> 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
>
--
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
