From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Turmel Subject: Re: raid6 array assembled from 11 drives and 2 spares - not enough to start the array Date: Sun, 08 Sep 2013 09:30:33 -0400 Message-ID: <522C7BF9.2020107@turmel.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: =?UTF-8?B?R2Fyw7BhciBBcm5hcnNzb24=?= Cc: linux-raid List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 09/07/2013 07:49 PM, Gar=C3=B0ar Arnarsson wrote: > I seem to have been able to resolve this. >=20 > I tried force assembling the array with all the drives except for sda= 1 > (the problematic device before) that way the array got assembled with > 12 drives and one spare, enough so I could recover the array. >=20 > Still would want to know what might have caused these problems for th= e > first place, but I'm glad it seems to be working ok for now. In my years of helping people on this list, the single most common caus= e of spurious dropouts is mismatched error recovery timeouts. Caused by use of desktop hard drives in raid arrays. You should search the list archives for various combinations of "scterc" "device/timeout" "tler" and "ure". Then report the following on the list (inline, not attached): for x in /sys/block/*/device/timeout ; do echo $x $(< $x) ; done smartctl -x /dev/sd[a-q] HTH, Phil -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" i= n the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html