From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWljaGHFgiBTYXdpY3o=?= Subject: Re: Help with data recovery - RAID6 with 2 failed drives and another with broken sectors Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 00:56:25 +0200 Message-ID: <5251EA99.60208@sawicz.net> References: <524A07DC.1040002@sawicz.net> <524B2158.2020900@sawicz.net> <5251D9AF.9030402@turmel.org> <5251DFF9.4050708@sawicz.net> <5251E0FA.2030206@turmel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5251E0FA.2030206@turmel.org> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Phil Turmel Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids On 07.10.2013 00:15, Phil Turmel wrote: > No, just fix the timeouts. Otherwise, you'll be kicking drives out > *way* more often than you think. Ah! Now I've actually read through some of the finds (and found dozens=20 of instances where you recommend the same - you *should* have a dime fo= r=20 every time you mention that to people), I'm happy to report that just=20 one of my drives (at least from what they claim) does not support scter= c=20 - the rest just had it disabled... This is fixed now, and a brand new=20 udev rule should take care of the timeout for the other drive. This=20 should make my array way more stable - thank you so much! > Do check your smartctl reports for actual relocations, though. In my > experience, once you pass single digits, further failures are rapid. Smartd is notifying me of all such - and since most of the drives are=20 still under warranty - I replace them as soon as possible when they=20 start to show up bad blocks. Again, thank you Phil for your patience. --=20 Micha=C5=82 (Saviq) Sawicz -- 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