On Wed, 2012-11-21 at 18:47 +0100, Sebastian Riemer wrote: > > OK. So if I understand correctly, mdadm -fail has no effect that > > persists past a reboot, and doesn't write to disk anything that > would > > prevent the use of the failed RAID component.(*) But if I write to > > sysfs, the failure wil persist across reboots. > > > > This behavior is quite surprising to me. Is there some reason for > this > > design? > > Yes, sometimes hardware has only a short issue and operates as > expected > afterwards. Therefore, there is an error threshold. It could be very > annoying to zero the superblock and to resync everything only because > there was a short controller issue or something similar. Without this > you also couldn't remove and re-add devices for testing. BTW, the part that was surprising was not that the device could be re-added, but that it was re-added automatically on reboot. At the moment I have quite a few partitions running around with the same md UUID but slightly different information on them. Ross -- 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
