On Thu, 24 Apr 2014, Jeff Wiegley wrote:
I don't want to simply re-add the failed drives as I believe
they will start re-syncing won't they? I don't want their data
lost and overwritten. I want the drive to be treated like it
never failed in the first place.
I might have some filesystem corruption but not as much as I
will if the entire drive is resynced.
I also cannot repair the two other dead drives. So I need this
drive treated as is so that array can come up degraded. Then I
can get what data I can off it before replacing all drives
and probably starting fresh.
What do you mean by "repair"?
Well, anyway, if you --assemble --force with all parity drives gone, no
resync will be done.
As long as you do not use --create, no "bad" information will be synced
even if you use the previously failed drives. If their even count is way
off, then --assemble --force might give you a lot more corruption.
But my original point was that if you have a RAID6 with bitmap and two
drives are kicked out, but they are not dead, it's better to re-add them
back in, let things re-sync. You then run a "repair" on the volume so you
try to make sure that any UNC read errors are repaired by md.
Right now, you have no parity and any other UNC sectors will have to be
written to in order for you to get your data.
--
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
