On Sat, 6 Apr 2013, Oliver Schinagl wrote:
All that said when I did the assemble with the 'guessed' 3 correct drives.
Did of course increase the events count. sdc1 of course didn't partake in
this. Assuming that it is in sync with the rest, what is the worst that can
happen? And does the --read-only flag protect against it?
/dev/sdc1:
Update Time : Sat Mar 16 20:20:47 2013
Checksum : a7686a57 - correct
Events : 180132
As you probably already know, using sdc1 will mean you'll be playing with
part of the array that is out of date by 3 weeks (this update time
indicates that sdc1 fell out on Mar 16).
So I would definitely stay away from sdc1. It seems you have made a lot of
changes lately (your create time is in 2010 and on Mar 16 2013 you were up
to 180k events, and then now three weeks later the rest of the drives are
at 513k events, that seems like a of writes has been done to the array the
past tree weeks?).
So sdc1 is definitely not in sync according to this information. Using it
is risky, but as a last resort, sure.
--
Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@xxxxxxxxx
--
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
