Re: not enough operational mirrors

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Oops, I meant to say the error I get when trying to mount /srv is this:

root@dtla:~# mount /srv
mount: /dev/mapper/vg_raid10-srv: can't read superblock

Aren't there other copies of the superblock?  I'm not sure how it
works with LVM.

On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:17 AM, Ian Young <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I forced the three good disks and the one that was behind by two events to
> assemble:
>
> mdadm --assemble --force /dev/md0 /dev/sda2 /dev/sdb2 /dev/sdc2 /dev/sde2
>
> Then I added the other two disks and let it sync overnight:
>
> mdadm --add --force /dev/md0 /dev/sdd2
> mdadm --add --force /dev/md0 /dev/sdf2
>
> I rebooted the system in recovery mode and the root filesystem is back!
> However, / is read-only and my /srv partition, which is the largest and has
> most of my data, can't mount.  When I try to examine the array, it says "no
> md superblock detected on /dev/md0."  On top of the software RAID, I have
> four logical volumes.  Here is the full LVM configuration:
>
> http://pastebin.com/gzdZq5DL
>
> How do I recover the superblock?
>
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 10:47 PM, NeilBrown <neilb@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 21 Sep 2014 22:32:19 -0700 Ian Young <ian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> > My 6-drive software RAID 10 array failed.  The individual drives
>> > failed one at a time over the past few months but it's been an
>> > extremely busy summer and I didn't have the free time to RMA the
>> > drives and rebuild the array.  Now I'm wishing I had acted sooner
>> > because three of the drives are marked as removed and the array
>> > doesn't have enough mirrors to start.  I followed the recovery
>> > instructions at raid.wiki.kernel.org and, before making things any
>> > worse, saved the status using mdadm --examine and consulted this
>> > mailing list.  Here's the status:
>> >
>> > http://pastebin.com/KkV8e8Gq
>> >
>> > I can see that the event counts on sdd2 and sdf2 are significantly far
>> > behind, so we can consider that data too old.  sdc2 is only behind by
>> > two events, so any data loss there should be minimal.  If I can make
>> > the array start with sd[abce]2 I think that will be enough to mount
>> > the filesystem, back up my data, and start replacing drives.  How do I
>> > do that?
>>
>> Use the "--force" option with "--assemble".
>>
>> NeilBrown
>
>
--
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




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux