From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Stefan G. Weichinger" Subject: Re: Re-adding disks to RAID6 in a Fujitsu NAS: old mdadm? Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2012 10:18:30 +0200 Message-ID: <4FED64D6.9060305@xunil.at> References: <4FE9BFC1.5070607@xunil.at> <20120628163205.2c6a1122@notabene.brown> <4FEC1CE7.5010709@xunil.at> <4FEC2071.8010504@xunil.at> <20120628212257.5ca8fb05@notabene.brown> <4FEC7EB7.1000401@xunil.at> <4FECA1A8.7090608@xunil.at> <20120629073632.61f529a8@notabene.brown> Reply-To: lists@xunil.at Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20120629073632.61f529a8@notabene.brown> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: NeilBrown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids Am 28.06.2012 23:36, schrieb NeilBrown: > On Thu, 28 Jun 2012 20:25:44 +0200 "Stefan G. Weichinger" > wrote: >> What is the logic behind that? > > As you have guessed, it first recovered one device, then recovered > the second one. But it looks like there are no read errors on the > two good devices, so fear-not. Good to know. >> What does it do exactly when it re-adds the first disk, what in >> the second round? >> >> Should I have added sd[ab]3 in one command? > > Had you done that with a very new mdadm, it would have recovered > both at once. mdadm has to say: - disable recovery for now - here > is one new spare - here is another spare - ok, you can try recovery > now > > otherwise as soon as it gets one spare it will start recovery. Thanks for the explanation. >> To me it also seems that I now have good redundancy again >> already, correct? > > Correct. You have single redundancy and in about 10 hours since > your email you'll have double redundancy. It is still rebuilding, must have been slowed down by some processes using the filesystem at night. But still working.