From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.redhat.com (ext-mx13.extmail.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.110.18]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2PKaoB9012781 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:36:50 -0400 Received: from mail.bmsi.com (mail.bmsi.com [68.106.146.44]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2PKanCd020116 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:36:49 -0400 Received: from melissa.gathman.org (melissa.gathman.org [IPv6:2001:470:8:809::1003]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.bmsi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r2PKabG0001547 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:36:39 -0400 Message-ID: <5150B555.4010207@bmsi.com> Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:36:37 -0400 From: Stuart D Gathman MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <533CFD97-2715-4B1C-A8C5-02161911747D@googlemail.com> <51509ECB.4050901@bmsi.com> <244E0086-C561-4034-BF26-31DFC419B72F@googlemail.com> In-Reply-To: <244E0086-C561-4034-BF26-31DFC419B72F@googlemail.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] vg disappeared after replacing disc in raid10 Reply-To: LVM general discussion and development List-Id: LVM general discussion and development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" To: linux-lvm@redhat.com Long ago, Nostradamus foresaw that on 03/25/2013 04:25 PM, Bj=EF=BF=BDrn Nadrowski would write: > > I did recreate the physical volume and the volume group using pvcreate an= d vgcreate, please see the description of the problem=20 > on ubuntuforums for further details. > That was not a good idea. You've now written over the major clue to what happened. Examining the beginning of the PV for the metadata - perhaps offset or scrambled because of some inadvertent change to the raid10 parameters - should have been your major priority! Theory 2: the md driver on the knoppix CD is an earlier version that puts metadata at the end of the volume, instead of at the beginning.=20 This would change the offsets of your metadata and extents. It would not see the newer md raid metadata, and create a new drive. I'm not sure if this theory is consistent with your history. I *strongly* advise not doing any more writing to this device until you know *exactly* what happened.