From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "JaniD++" Subject: Re: where is the spare drive? :-) Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:11:52 +0100 Message-ID: <004f01c61758$42a5f090$a400a8c0@dcccs> References: <02a801c60f2a$de619ce0$a400a8c0@dcccs> <17349.51157.745149.135889@cse.unsw.edu.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Neil Brown Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-raid.ids ----- Original Message ----- From: "Neil Brown" To: "JaniD++" Cc: Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 4:07 AM Subject: Re: where is the spare drive? :-) > On Monday January 2, djani22@dynamicweb.hu wrote: > > > > 5. The question > > > > Why shows sdh2 as spare? > > The MD array size is correct. > > And i really can see, the all drive is reading, and sdh2 is *ONLY* writing. > > > > man mdadm > > Towards the end of the CREATE MODE section: > > When creating a RAID5 array, mdadm will automatically create a degraded > array with an extra spare drive. This is because building the spare > into a degraded array is in general faster than resyncing the parity on > a non-degraded, but not clean, array. This feature can be over-ridden > with the --force option. > > > I hope this clarifies the situation. > > NeilBrown Ahh, this was avoid my attention. The mdadm man page (and functionallity) is quite large. I think this is more important to let some people to overwrite own data. I think it is neccessary to place some note to the man page to warn people about this exception. Anyway this is a good idea! :-) Thanks to note me about this. Cheers, Janos > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html