From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andras Tantos Subject: Re: How to recover after md crash during reshape? Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 10:10:47 -0700 Message-ID: <56310197.1010708@tantosonline.com> References: <04cdcd6bd69b3aa1f8f24465f8485c90@tantosonline.com> <5626464D.9000502@turmel.org> <3baf849321d819483c5d20c005a31844@tantosonline.com> <562660EE.9020504@turmel.org> <72dc24dd30c19517d19887d794fd341b@tantosonline.com> <562D5F91.5040300@turmel.org> <5630F862.5040308@tantosonline.com> <5630FB05.5070902@turmel.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <5630FB05.5070902@turmel.org> Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Phil Turmel Cc: Linux-RAID List-Id: linux-raid.ids Phil, >> To be able to re-assemble the array, I *have* to specify metadata >> version 0.9: >> >> Is this a problem? Can I upgrade my array to 1.0 metadata? Should I? > > Hmm. Interesting. Your version of mdadm is insisting on reserving much > more space between end of content and the v1.0 metadata than when using > v0.90 metadata. > > I'm curious how much. Please show the output of "cat /proc/partitions". root@bazsalikom:/home/tantos# cat /proc/partitions major minor #blocks name 8 16 1465138584 sdb 8 17 1465136001 sdb1 8 48 1465138584 sdd 8 49 1465136001 sdd1 8 80 1465138584 sdf 8 81 1465136001 sdf1 8 96 1953513527 sdg 8 97 1953512001 sdg1 8 112 1953514584 sdh 8 113 538145 sdh1 8 114 1465138552 sdh2 8 115 487837854 sdh3 8 64 1953514584 sde 8 65 538145 sde1 8 66 1465138552 sde2 8 67 487837854 sde3 8 32 1953514584 sdc 8 33 538145 sdc1 8 34 1465138552 sdc2 8 35 487837854 sdc3 9 0 487837760 md0 9 1 7325679680 md1 Andras