FW: Disk failure during grow, what is the current state.

FW: Disk failure during grow, what is the current state.

[Steve Fairbairn]

I'm having a nightmare with emails today.  I can't get a single one
right first time.  Apologies to Alex for sending it directly to him and
not to the list on first attempt.

Steve

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steve Fairbairn [mailto:steve@fairbairn-family.com] 
> Sent: 06 February 2008 15:02
> To: 'Nagilum'
> Subject: RE: Disk failure during grow, what is the current state.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
> > [mailto:linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Nagilum
> > Sent: 06 February 2008 14:34
> > To: Steve Fairbairn
> > Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: Disk failure during grow, what is the current state.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > If a drive failes during reshape the reshape will just
> > continue. The blocks which were on the failed drive are 
> > calculated from the the  
> > other disks and writes to the failed disk are simply omitted. 
> > The result is a raid5 with a failed drive. You should get a 
> > new drive asap to restore the redundancy. Also it's kinda 
> > important that you don't run 2.6.23 because it has a  
> > nasty bug which would be triggered in this scenario.
> > The reshape probably increased in speed after the system was 
> > no longer  
> > actively used and io bandwidth freed up.
> > Kind regards,
> > Alex.
> > 
> 
> Thanks for the response Alex, but....
> 
>      Array Size : 1953535744 (1863.04 GiB 2000.42 GB)
>   Used Dev Size : 488383936 (465.76 GiB 500.11 GB)
> 
> Surely the added disk should now been added to the Array 
> Size?  5 * 500GB is 2500GB, not 2000GB.  This is why I don't 
> think the reshape has continued.  As for speeding up because 
> of no IO badwidth, this also doesn't actually hold very true, 
> because the system was at a point of not being used anyway 
> before I added the disk, and I didn't unmount the drive until 
> this morning after it claimed it had finished doing anything.
> 
> It's because the size doesn't match up to all 5 disks being 
> used that I still wonder at the state of the array.
> 
> Steve.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1261 - Release 
> Date: 05/02/2008 20:57
>  
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1261 - Release Date:
05/02/2008 20:57
 

RE: Disk failure during grow, what is the current state.

[Steve Fairbairn]

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Steve Fairbairn [mailto:steve@fairbairn-family.com]
> > Sent: 06 February 2008 15:02
> > To: 'Nagilum'
> > Subject: RE: Disk failure during grow, what is the current state.
> > 
> > 
> >      Array Size : 1953535744 (1863.04 GiB 2000.42 GB)
> >   Used Dev Size : 488383936 (465.76 GiB 500.11 GB)
> > 
> > Surely the added disk should now been added to the Array
> > Size?  5 * 500GB is 2500GB, not 2000GB.  This is why I don't 
> > think the reshape has continued.  As for speeding up because 
> > of no IO badwidth, this also doesn't actually hold very true, 
> > because the system was at a point of not being used anyway 
> > before I added the disk, and I didn't unmount the drive until 
> > this morning after it claimed it had finished doing anything.
> > 

Thanks again to Alex for his comments.  I've just rebooted the box, and
the reshape has continued on the degraded array and an RMA has been
raised for the faulty disk.

Thanks,

Steve.

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.20/1261 - Release Date:
05/02/2008 20:57