From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew Burgess <aab@cichlid.com>
Subject: Re: Recreate raid 10 array
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 03:47:17 -0700
Message-ID: <1239274037.23944.3.camel@cichlid.com>
References: <49DA5CE6.7030902@gmx.net> <87prfpdm8y.fsf@frosties.localdomain>
	 <49DD1B87.2050804@tmr.com> <1239227842.18515.8.camel@cichlid.com>
	 <49DD21C6.4060200@gmx.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <49DD21C6.4060200@gmx.net>
Sender: linux-raid-owner@vger.kernel.org
To: LCID Fire <lcid-fire@gmx.net>
Cc: linux-raid@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-raid.ids

On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 00:14 +0200, LCID Fire wrote:

> > Most fscks can be told to run read-only so they won't write to the
> > device and also interactive so they ask before writing so you should be
> > able to avoid recopying. The ext3 journal recovery violates at least one
> > of these IIRC (or used to) so if it's ext3 find an option to tell it to
> > ignore the journal.

> Too late. The journal recovery did complain quite a bit and I didn't 
> know better than to have it fix the things it liked to fix.

Sorry to hear that. Actually our advice should have been to assemble the
array read-only, then all manner of fs bugs/features could not write to
it.

If anyone ever implements the --wild-ass-guess/--recreate mdadm option
perhaps that should automatically set read-only?