Hi Nicolas,
{ Top posting repaired. Please don't do that. Convention on kernel.org
is reply-to-all, trim unnecessary quotes, and either bottom post or
interleave. }
On 11/03/2015 09:21 AM, Nicolas Tellier wrote:
> 2015-11-02 19:19 GMT+01:00 Phil Turmel <philip@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>> Good afternoon Nicolas,
[trim /]
>>> Luckily I saved the original command used to create this array. Here
>>> is the one I think would be relevant in this case :
>>>
>>> mdadm --create --verbose --assume-clean /dev/md0 --level=5
>>> --metadata=1.2 --chunk=128 --raid-devices=4 /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1
>>> /dev/sdc1 missing /dev/sdd
>>
>> 1) Leave off /dev/sdd
>> 2) Include --data-offset=262144
> Hi Phil, and thanks for taking the time to reply to me.
>
> I'm not sure I understood you advice correctly.
> When you say leave off /dev/sdd, do you mean I should recreate a 3
> disks array like this :
> mdadm --create --verbose --assume-clean /dev/md0 --level=5
> --metadata=1.2 --chunk=128 --data-offset=262144 --raid-devices=3
> /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
No.
> Or a 4 disks array with no mention of /dev/sdd, like this (my instinct
> tell me that wouldn't work) :
> mdadm --create --verbose --assume-clean /dev/md0 --level=5
> --metadata=1.2 --chunk=128 --data-offset=262144 --raid-devices=4
> /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1
No, but closer.
> Or, as I was thinking originally, to put /dev/sdd as missing, like so:
> mdadm --create --verbose --assume-clean /dev/md0 --level=5
> --metadata=1.2 --chunk=128 --data-offset=262144 --raid-devices=4
> /dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 missing /dev/sdd
No. The keyword "missing" takes the place of a device you don't want to
include:
mdadm --create --verbose --assume-clean /dev/md0 --level=5
--metadata=1.2 --chunk=128 --data-offset=262144 --raid-devices=4
/dev/sda1 /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdc1 missing
> In the eventuality of having to start back from scratch, I'll be sure
> to clean everything (zero-superblock and all) and check the health of
> all the devices. Raid 6 might be more suited to withstand some of my
> episodic stupidity :)
I recommend raid6 for all bulk storage arrays larger than 4T capacity,
unless the data can be easily reconstructed from other sources.
> I'm tempted to subscribe to the mailing list, but I'm afraid of the
> volume of e-mail I'm going to get. I originally tried to search
> through the archives, but couldn't find anything relevant to my case.
> I'm looking right now at the "timeout mismatch" results.
This list gets a few dozen emails a day, or less. I use filtering tools
to put the mails into a dedicated folder, skipping my inbox. (Unless
I'm named due to reply-to-all.) That makes them easy to manage.
Please take the timeout mismatch problem seriously -- it breaks many
people's arrays.
Phil
--
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
