On 4 March 2010 12:01, John Robinson <john.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 04/03/2010 11:30, Alex Boag-Munroe wrote:
>>
>> Hi guys...
>>
>> Yes I am an idiot. I was changing the chunk size of my RAID5 array
>> last night from 64kb to 256kb and left it running overnight. During
>> the night we had a power outage.
>>
>> This is where the idiot part comes in. The backup file is on a
>> filesystem that's part of the RAID5 array, so obviously I am unable to
>> start it. I completely forgot the filesystem I specified for
>> --backup-file was part of the same array.
>>
>> Once you're all done pointing and laughing, can you let me know if I
>> am totally screwed? I've a lot of data here that I -really- don't
>> want to lose...
>>
>> Please help..
>>
>> Idiot.
>>
>> --
>> Alex Boag-Munroe
>>
>> Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
>
> OK, I was done pointing and laughing, until I saw your signature. Did you
> choose that on purpose or did Gmail pick it for you?
>
> I'm afraid I can't help with your problem, except to say that I've a feeling
> you ought to be able to manually restart the half-reshaped array without the
> backup file, so the worst case ought to be that you might lose one backup
> file's worth of data. However, kernel and mdadm versions together with
> output of `mdadm --detail` of your md device and `mdadm --examine` of its
> constituent devices will help those more knowledgeable than me tell you what
> to do next. If you're lucky the boss, Neil Brown, will help but I imagine
> he's asleep right now since he lives in Australia and it's the middle of the
> night there.
>
> Best of luck,
>
> John.
>
Hi John, thanks so much for your reply.
That is my signature and I stand by it, hence the whole "me idiot" and
not DEMANDING I get help etc.
mdadm is version 3.1.1. New developments. I found a post on the
internet where Neil recommended to someone to recreate the array
without erasing it. Which I have done, mdadm starts the array and
mdadm -D shows that almost a terabyte of space is in use.
However, mdadm -D also shows a chunk size of 512k, which is neither
the 64k original chunk nor the 512k I asked for.
Kernel version is gentoo-sources-2.6.33.
Output of mdadm --examine for /dev/sda5 through /dev/sdd5:
/dev/sda5:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 0.90.00
UUID : 17862986:014cb4c0:ffe6e849:786ed339 (local to host ncc-1701-e)
Creation Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:24 2010
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 974767616 (929.61 GiB 998.16 GB)
Array Size : 2924302848 (2788.83 GiB 2994.49 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Update Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:29 2010
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Checksum : b951290 - correct
Events : 3
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 512K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 0 8 5 0 active sync /dev/sda5
0 0 8 5 0 active sync /dev/sda5
1 1 8 21 1 active sync /dev/sdb5
2 2 8 37 2 active sync /dev/sdc5
3 3 8 53 3 active sync /dev/sdd5
/dev/sdb5:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 0.90.00
UUID : 17862986:014cb4c0:ffe6e849:786ed339 (local to host ncc-1701-e)
Creation Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:24 2010
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 974767616 (929.61 GiB 998.16 GB)
Array Size : 2924302848 (2788.83 GiB 2994.49 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Update Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:29 2010
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Checksum : b9512a2 - correct
Events : 3
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 512K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 1 8 21 1 active sync /dev/sdb5
0 0 8 5 0 active sync /dev/sda5
1 1 8 21 1 active sync /dev/sdb5
2 2 8 37 2 active sync /dev/sdc5
3 3 8 53 3 active sync /dev/sdd5
/dev/sdc5:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 0.90.00
UUID : 17862986:014cb4c0:ffe6e849:786ed339 (local to host ncc-1701-e)
Creation Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:24 2010
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 974767616 (929.61 GiB 998.16 GB)
Array Size : 2924302848 (2788.83 GiB 2994.49 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Update Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:29 2010
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Checksum : b9512b4 - correct
Events : 3
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 512K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 2 8 37 2 active sync /dev/sdc5
0 0 8 5 0 active sync /dev/sda5
1 1 8 21 1 active sync /dev/sdb5
2 2 8 37 2 active sync /dev/sdc5
3 3 8 53 3 active sync /dev/sdd5
/dev/sdd5:
Magic : a92b4efc
Version : 0.90.00
UUID : 17862986:014cb4c0:ffe6e849:786ed339 (local to host ncc-1701-e)
Creation Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:24 2010
Raid Level : raid5
Used Dev Size : 974767616 (929.61 GiB 998.16 GB)
Array Size : 2924302848 (2788.83 GiB 2994.49 GB)
Raid Devices : 4
Total Devices : 4
Preferred Minor : 1
Update Time : Thu Mar 4 13:10:29 2010
State : clean
Active Devices : 4
Working Devices : 4
Failed Devices : 0
Spare Devices : 0
Checksum : b9512c6 - correct
Events : 3
Layout : left-symmetric
Chunk Size : 512K
Number Major Minor RaidDevice State
this 3 8 53 3 active sync /dev/sdd5
0 0 8 5 0 active sync /dev/sda5
1 1 8 21 1 active sync /dev/sdb5
2 2 8 37 2 active sync /dev/sdc5
3 3 8 53 3 active sync /dev/sdd5
Booting with autodetecting raid, states that there's no valid 0.9 superblock.
--
Alex Boag-Munroe
Lack of planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on mine.
--
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
