On Sun Sep 26, 2010 at 03:34:17PM -0400, Mike Hartman wrote:
> >> At any rate, that doesn't help me with my most immediate issue: does a
> >> drive failing during a reshape corrupt the array? Or am I safe to
> >> resume the reshape? Is there any way to restore my safety net a bit
> >> before resuming the reshape, or will I just have to hope nothing else
> >> goes wrong between now and the time the new hot spare is finally
> >> incorporated?
> >>
> > Failure of a device during the reshape certainly shouldn't corrupt the
> > array (I don't see how it would anyway, unless there's a screw-up in the
> > code).
>
> I guess I was thinking that the reshape was restriping all the data
> under the assumption of 7 (or 8) drives, and one failing might change
> the restriping requirements in midstream and leave it in an
> unrecoverable in-between state. Very glad to hear that's not the case.
>
I've not looked at the code, so I can't be certain. I'm pretty sure
I've had this happen to me during a reshape though, without any issues.
> > I don't think there's any way to "restore your safety net"
> > though (short of imaging all the drives as backups), but it's probably
> > worth while doing a read test of all member devices before you continue.
>
> Can you recommend a good way to perform such a read test? Would I just
> dd the entire contents of each disk to /dev/null or is there a more
> efficient way of doing it?
>
That's what I'd do anyway. You could also try running a full SMART
test - that should pick up anything. I'd still go with dd though, as
I'm more confident of what that's actually doing.
Good luck,
Robin
--
___
( ' } | Robin Hill <robin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
/ / ) | Little Jim says .... |
// !! | "He fallen in de water !!" |
Attachment:
pgp_UkgTqcdbK.pgp
Description: PGP signature
