On Sunday 25 November 2012 11:13:06 Piergiorgio Sartor wrote: > On Sat, Nov 24, 2012 at 10:37:49PM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > > I was looking at the hot-replace (want_replacement) feature, and I > > had a thought: it would be nice to have this in a form which > > *didn't* fail the incumbent drive after the operation is over, and > > instead turned it into a spare. This would make it much easier and > > safer to periodically rotate and test any hot spares in the system. > > The main problem with hot spares is that you don't actually know if > > they work properly until there is a failover... > > I go for this one. > > Actually, this was also my original thinking for > the "proactive replacement". > > The only thing that, in addition, should be done, > is to keep the spare in sleep mode until needed > (either for hot replacement or for real replacement). > > bye, Hello, personally I would vote for an option to rotate spares into and array like Peter suggests, keeping a drive idle doesn't guarrantee that it's actually operational. /Tommy -- 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
