Re: possible bug in md

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Neil,

On 07/14/11 01:11, NeilBrown wrote:
I have made some changes to RAID10 so that it will not report that
a device has failed when really it hasn't.  It will abort the recovery,
ensure that another recovery doesn't automatically restart, and will
report why the recovery was aborted.

Many thanks for taking care of that!

On a related note, do you know what would happen if on a 3-device RAID1 (mirror), I failed one of the drives, and triggered a rebuild onto a spare, and then determined which device is the "source" for the rebuild, and yanked it out (or failed it)?

Would the RAID1 recover and start syncing from the next available (last remaining) valid device, or will it fail? If you don't know, I will conduct a test and report the result.

Cheers,
Iordan
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux