From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Phil Turmel Subject: Re: [UU_] Won't go away Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2015 08:34:10 -0400 Message-ID: <562F6F42.4070302@turmel.org> References: <562F6B56.9040901@highpoweredhelp.com> <562F6CBE.5020504@turmel.org> <562F6DEA.3010409@highpoweredhelp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <562F6DEA.3010409@highpoweredhelp.com> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Munger Cc: Linux-RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids Hi Michael, {Added the list back and fixed the top-posting. Convention on kernel.org is to reply-to-all, trim replies, and bottom post or interleave.} On 10/27/2015 08:28 AM, Michael Munger wrote: > On 10/27/2015 08:23 AM, Phil Turmel wrote: >> On 10/27/2015 08:17 AM, Michael Munger wrote: >>> Personalities : [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] >>> md0 : active raid5 sdd1[3] sdc1[1] sdb1[0] >>> 3906764800 blocks super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [3/2] >>> [UU_] >>> [>....................] recovery = 0.1% (2611780/1953382400) >>> finish=1737.7min speed=18709K/sec >>> bitmap: 0/15 pages [0KB], 65536KB chunk >> What's to fix? Did you try waiting for the recovery to finish? >> Creating an array generally isn't instant -- the redundancy has to be >> computed over the entire array. >> >> Now, you might have speed limits that are making it slower than possible >> (see man md), but multiple hours on big devices is perfectly normal. > I thought [UU_] indicated a physical drive problem, not logical array > issue. I'll wait until 2pm when this is supposed to finish and re-check. I mentioned the speed limits because 20MB/sec is kinda low for modern drives. You can probably speed that up. > It will be GREAT if that's all it was... my being impatient! > > PS... lsdrv is a great utility. thanks for making it available on Github. You're welcome :-) Phil