All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Possible failure & recovery
@ 2009-08-10 18:08 Daniel L. Miller
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Daniel L. Miller @ 2009-08-10 18:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: linux-raid

I'm not 100% certain about this...but maybe.

I had setup a small box as a remote backup for our company.  I THOUGHT I 
had set it up as a Raid-10 - but I can't swear to it now.  I just had a 
need to try to recover a file from that backup - only to find we just 
had an error.

Checking mdadm.conf, I find -
ARRAY /dev/.static/dev/md0 level=raid10 num-devices=4 
devices=/dev/sda,/dev/sdb,/dev/sdc,/dev/sdd 
UUID=7ec24ccc:973f5065:a79315d0:449291b3 auto=part

Now, I do know that one of the drives had failed previously (sdd), and 
the array has been operating in degraded condition for some time.  Now 
it appears that a second drive failed.  I received XFS errors and only 
two drives showed under /proc/mdstat (sdb was removed as well as sdd).

xfs_check reported errors.  Whether or not it was a good idea, I tried 
adding sdb back to the array.  It worked and started rebuilding.  Then I 
noticed that the array was reporting as "raid6".  I don't know when it 
BECAME raid6, if I always had it as such or if the raid-10 somehow 
degraded and became raid-6.  If it actually did so - that might make for 
some type of a migration/expansion path for a raid-10 array that needs 
to grow.

My xfs_repair -L /dev/md0 process is currently running...I'm holding my 
breath to see how much I get back...
-- 
Daniel


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2009-08-10 18:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-08-10 18:08 Possible failure & recovery Daniel L. Miller

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.