On 2012-01-31, Keith Keller <kkeller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I recently had a RAID6 lose two drives in quick succession, with one > spare already in place. The rebuild started fine with the spare, but > now that I've replaced the failed disks, should I expect the current > rebuild to finish, then rebuild on another spare? [snip] Well, for better or worse, this is now a moot question--I had another drive kicked out of the array, I believe prematurely by the controller. I was able to --assemble --force the array, and it is now rebuilding two spares instead of one. AFAIR there was no activity on the filesystem at the time, so I am optimistic that the filesystem should be fine after an fsck. Thanks to the advice from last time which suggested --assemble --force instead of --assume-clean in this situation. Could it have been the older version of mdadm that didn't tell the kernel to start rebuilding the added spare? I have made 3.2.3 my default mdadm, which I hope alleviates some of the issues I've had with rebuilds not starting. (As an aside, I've also bitten the bullet and decided to swap out all the WD-EARS drives for real RAID drives; ideally I'd replace the controller, but I don't want to invest the time needed to replace and test all the components properly.) --keith -- kkeller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
