On 21/04/13 16:20, Ben Bucksch wrote:
Brad Campbell wrote, On 21.04.2013 09:23:
As others have already told you, md does not go randomly kicking
drives from arrays. Your system had a failure of some kind which
caused the loss of two drives.
You ignore the facts and do "mi mi mi" in face of bugs reports. 2
different arrays lost 1 drive, both at the same time at reboot after the
OS upgrade, and both drives are working fine. Facts.
Those are not facts, they are uninformed guesses at what happened. You
have no facts other than something bad happened and two drives were
ejected from the array. If you had actual facts then we'd have been able
to assist you in determining what actually happened and how it might
have been rectified.
And even *if* they had a temporary error, my case shows why it's a *bug*
to kick them out of the array. And it's a *bug* to not let me put them
back in with data. Tons of other people have suffered dataloss because
of various temporary, easily recoverable problems and these 2 bugs.
It's not a bug. It is working as intended. That it is not working the
way _you_ would like it to work is not a bug at all.
When you have an array, you don't get "temporary errors". It's either
good or its not. An error is an error is an error. You had an error,
which means something in your storage stack is broken. That you can't
figure out what it is is even more insidious and needs to be fixed
before you can continue.
May I point you at the source of both the kernel and md and suggest if
you'd like it to "work" differently you might attempt to make it do so.
Question. Have you ever worked with hardware arrays? What do you think
would happen in the same set of circumstances with a hardware array
(hint, precisely the same thing). The bonus with md is (if you know what
you are doing and with the right assistance) you can do things like
--create --assume-clean and get access to your data. You can't do that
with any hardware array I've ever used.
People like you are the reason why people like me suffer dataloss.
Riiiight.
Remember, and I quote "I have to do risky operations like re-create that
can easily destroy all data. Effectively, md achieves the opposite that
is intended: It actively risks and destroys my data."
So you knew the operation was risky, yet you went ahead without enough
information to do it safely and blitzed all your data. I'm sorry, but
that's not my fault.
Again : "Good news: In my desperation, I now ran the following dangerous
command: mdadm --create /dev/md0 --assume-clean --level=raid5 -n 8
--chunk=64 --layout=left-symmetric --metadata=0.90 /dev/sdj missing
/dev/sdl /dev/sd[mopnq]"
How did you verify you had your disks in the correct order? Where did
that command line come from?
This will be my last post on the subject. I pointed you at a path of
action in my last post.
--
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
